Standing with Unfamiliar Company on Uncommon Ground: The Catholic Church and the Chicago Parliaments of Religions

by

Carlos Hugo Parra

A thesis submitted in conformity with the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy

Theory and Policy Studies in Education

Ontario Institute for Studies in Education University of Toronto

© Copyright by Carlos Hugo Parra 2012

ii

Standing with Unfamiliar Company on Uncommon Ground:

The Catholic Church and the Chicago Parliaments of Religions

Carlos Hugo Parra

Doctor of Philosophy

Theory and Policy Studies in Education

University of Toronto

2012

Abstract

This study explores the struggle of the Catholic Church to be true to itself and its mission in the

midst of other religions, in the context of the non-Catholic American culture, and in relation to

the modern world and its discontents. As milestones of the global interfaith movement, American

religious freedom and pluralism, and the relation of religion to modernity, the Chicago

Parliaments of Religions offer a unique window through which to view this Catholic struggle at

work in the religious public square created by the Parliaments and the evolution of that struggle

over the course of the century framed by the two Chicago events.

In relation to other religions, the Catholic Church stretched itself from an exclusivist position of

being the only true and good religion to an inclusivist position of recognizing that truth and good

can be present in other religions. Uniquely, Catholic involvement in the centennial Parliament

made the Church stretch itself even further, beyond the exclusivist-inclusivist spectrum into a

pluralist framework in which the Church acted humbly as one religion among many.

In relation to American culture, the Catholic Church stretched itself from a Eurocentric and

monarchic worldview with claims of Catholic supremacy to the American alternative of

iii

democracy, religious freedom, and the separation of church and state.

In relation to modernity, the Church stretched itself from viewing the modern world as an enemy

to be fought and conquered to befriending modernity and designing some specific

accommodations to it.

In these three relationships, there was indeed a shift, but not at all a clean break. Instead a stretch

occurred, acknowledging a lived intra-Catholic tension between religious exclusivism and

inclusivism, between a universal Catholic identity and Catholic inculturation in America (and in

other cultures), and between the immutability of Catholic eternal truths and their translatability

into the new languages offered by the modern world. In all this the Second Vatican Council was

the major catalyst. For all three cases the Chicago Parliaments of Religions serve as

environments conducive to the raising of important questions about Catholic identity, the

Catholic understanding of non-Catholics, and Catholic interfaith relations.

iv

To my beloved parents, Juan and Nelsa,

my first and ongoing teachers,

and

to those in the Roman Catholic Church

who have the freedom to be themselves,

the courage to hold different opinions,

the humility to accept their fallibility,

and the love to embrace the Church

in the totality of its complexity.

v

Acknowledgments

The author wishes to acknowledge

In Toronto

Professor Harold Troper, the thesis supervisor, for his academic maturity as a seasoned historian,

his careful attention as an open interlocutor, his expedite responsiveness to the various demands

of the dissertation process, and his wise flexibility to embrace with a positive attitude and a good

sense of humor even the most transcendental questions and topics; Janet Somerville, former

Editor of the Catholic New Times and former General Secretary of the Canadian Council of

Churches, for her proofreading of the manuscript and her insightful Catholic and ecumenical

feedback; Professors Mark McGowan, Rosa Bruno Jofre, Ruth Sandwell, David Levine, and

Glen Jones for their helpful suggestions and/or questions;

University of Toronto Robarts Library, Interlibrary Loan and Media Archives and Microform;

University of St. Michael’s College Kelly Library, Special Collections; Victoria University E. J.

Pratt Library, Special Collections; Regis College Library; Trinity College Graham Library;

In Rome

Bishop Luis Manuel Cuna Ramos, Archivist of the Propaganda Fide Archives; Dr. Marco Grilli,

Secretary of the Prefecture of the Secret Vatican Archives; Archbishop Francesco Gioia, Vatican

Delegate to the 1993 Parliament of Religions; Monsignor Andrew Vissanu Thanya-anan,

Undersecretary of the Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue; Rev. Francisco Egaña, SJ,

Vice Rector of the Pontifical Gregorian University; Monsignor Gerald Cadieres Araujo, Officer

of the Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of Faith; Pallotini Fathers and Brothers, Basilica of

San Silvestro Community;

In Chicago

DePaul University Special Collections and Archives Department; Kathryn DeGraff, Department

Head; Morgen MacIntosh Hodgetts, Archivist Librarian; Michelle McCoy, Bibliographic

Assistant; Helen Fedchack, Archives Assistant; Ben Martorrel, Graduate Student Assistant; Kelle

Gosa, Graduate Student Assistant; Rev. Thomas Baima, former director of the Office of

vi

Ecumenical and Interreligious Affairs of the Archdiocese of Chicago; Sister Joan McGuire,

Director, Office of Ecumenical and Interreligious Affairs, Archdiocese of Chicago; Mr. Jim

Kenney, former Program Chair of the Council for a Parliament of the World’s Religions;

Professor Robert Schreiter, Catholic Theological Union;

In Berkeley and Big Sur, California

Lucinda Glenn, Archivist, and David Stiver, Special Collections, Graduate Theological Union,

Berkeley, California; Rev. Thomas Matus, OSB Cam, Camaldolese Monastery of the

Incarnation; Rev. Bruno Barnhardt, OSB Cam, New Camaldoli Hermitage;

In Maracaibo, Venezuela

Most Reverend Ubaldo Santana, Archbishop of Maracaibo; Maria Gracia Parra, Mariela

Hernandez, and Maria Carolina Acosta;

His supportive family and friends and thesis-related interlocutors

His parents Nelsa Pirela de Parra and Juan Parra Vera, his sister María Gracia Parra, and his

friends Alberto Dumit, Oscar Yánez, Rona McDonald, Frank Coffey, Charles Fensham, and Dr.

Brian Bustard;

Scholarships and Grants

Ontario Institute for Studies in Education’s Guaranteed Funding Package (2007-2011);

University of Toronto School of Graduate Studies Thesis Research Travel Grant (2010); Ontario

Study Abroad Opportunity Award (2010); Embassy of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela to

the Vatican (2010); Franciscan Friars of the Atonement’s “That Nothing Be Lost” Fund (2010);

University of Toronto’s Doctoral Completion Award (2011-2012).

All interpretations and opinions are solely the responsibility of the author.

vii

Table of Contents

Point of departure: a frame of reference and a personal note

“Can the Church afford not to be there?”

Towards the World’s Parliament of Religions in Chicago

First steps towards Catholic involvement

The decision of the Catholic Church to participate

A Pilgrimage to Chicago

Catholic Educational Exhibit and Columbian Catholic Congress

“It would seem more advisable to hold assemblies apart”

The World’s Parliament of Religions

Catholic delegates and Catholic Day

A Catholic dissenter who was not invited

Adjournment of the Parliament

Mixed reactions

A Methodist minister’s call to the Pope

Toronto’s little Congress on Religion and Education

European responses and Vatican discouragement

The Parliament idea “on hold”

viii

“Let the fresh air come in”: From Anti-Modernism to Aggiornamento

A new contemptus mundi: modernity as an enemy

The enemy inside de house: the heresy of the twentieth century

The Second Vatican Council: the Catholic Church embracing modernity

The good Pope and Vatican II

The Catholic Church and other religions

John Paul II and the Assisi Event of 1986

“Your efforts deserve our most careful consideration”

Towards a Centennial Celebration of the 1893 World’s Parliament of Religions

The 1933 Parliament of Religions in Chicago

“We are both beneficiaries”

Attempts of other potential stakeholders

The decision of the Catholic Church to participate

“Inexperienced, underfunded, understaffed and running out of time”

“The most diverse celebration in history”

The Parliament of the World’s Religions

An almost totally inclusive program

Conflict at the Centennial Parliament

India-related issues

Jewish withdrawal

ix

Greek Orthodox withdrawal

Other issues

“In omnia, Caritas”

The Complexity of the Catholic presence

Vatican II and parallel ecumenical developments

Common ethical concerns

Aboriginal-Catholic identity

Buddhist-Catholic dialogue

Hindu-Catholic interaction

Catholic Women at the Parliament

Catholic critics, dissenters, “apostates” and absentees

The Declaration towards a Global Ethic

The Assembly of Religious and Spiritual Leaders

Closing Plenary and Aftermath

Point of arrival, not a final destination: The Catholic Church and the Chicago Parliaments of

Religions

The meaning(s) of Catholic identity and the Chicago Parliaments of Religions

The non-Catholic Other and the Chicago Parliaments of Religions

Catholic interfaith relations at the Chicago Parliaments of Religions

x

“What remains of the world of deeds is the world of words” (Historiography survey)

The 1893 Parliament of Religions

The 1993 Parliament of Religions

Sources, Archives, and Bibliography

xi

List of Appendices

Appendix A: Timeline

Appendix B: Catholics in Chicago’s 1893 Parliament of Religions program

Appendix C: Catholics in Chicago’s 1993 Parliament of Religions program

Appendix D: Alphabetic Gender Breakdown of 1993 Catholic Participants

1

Point of Departure: A frame of reference and a personal note

This is the story of a community that for centuries understood itself as the exclusive

recipient of what it considers the greatest of all gifts: the knowledge of truth and the path

to salvation through the incarnation, death and resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ, the

Only Son of God. Entrusted by its Master and Savior with the task of proclaiming the

good news of salvation to the whole world, this community has always considered

engagement in missionary activity around the world to be one of its primary duties and

rights, so that people of every race, language, and nation may be saved and come to the

knowledge of truth. With a millenary tradition rooted in the soil seeded by the blood of

the Apostles Peter and Paul, and in the face of diverse and sometimes competing centers

of Christian faith, this community –vastly spread throughout the world—came to

understand itself as the primary heir and dispenser of the inscrutable riches of the grace

of God. This claim of primacy and authority took a more definite shape in the leadership

of the Bishop of Rome, conceived as the successor of Peter and understood to be

entrusted with the office of being the Vicar of Christ on earth. The primacy of the Bishop

of Rome became a visible sign of universal unity, and a distinct feature of the

community. This community has come to see itself as above any other form of

Christianity, and certainly above any other form of religion at large, and it hopes and

prays that those who believe in the good news of salvation throughout the world may

eventually be united as one flock under one shepherd, that is the Pope.

However, the claims of this community, a community within which this author is at

home, are challenged by the fact that there are other forms of Christianity that claim to be

no less or even more authentic and genuine expressions of the Christian message. And

there are non-Christian religions with either equally exclusivist claims, or with ancient

and venerable traditions much older than Christianity, and upheld with equal fervor by

their adherents.

2

The exposure of this community to other forms of Christianity and to multiple non-

Christian religions as one among many found a unique expression in the two Parliaments

of Religions that convened in the city of Chicago one hundred years apart.

This study explores the struggle of the Catholic Church to be true to itself and its mission

in the midst of other religions, in the context of the non-Catholic American culture, and

in relation to the modern world and its discontents.1 As milestones of the global interfaith

movement, American religious freedom and pluralism, and the relation of religion to

modernity, the Chicago Parliaments of Religions offer a unique window through which to

view this Catholic struggle at work in the religious public square created by the

Parliaments and the evolution of that struggle over the course of the century between the

two Chicago events.

The century framed by the Chicago Parliaments of Religions witnessed the millenary

ability of the Catholic Church to cope with change outside and inside itself. In relation to

other religions, the Catholic Church stretched itself from an exclusivist position of being

the only true and good religion to an inclusivist position of recognizing that truth and

good can be present in other religions while continuing to understand itself as the

divinely chosen recipient and guardian of the revealed truths that light the way to

salvation, and as the dispenser of God-given gifts that nourish goodness in those who

receive them. Uniquely, Catholic involvement in the centennial Parliament made the

Church stretch itself even further, beyond the exclusivist-inclusivist spectrum into a

pluralist framework in which the Church acted humbly as one religion among many.

In relation to American culture, the Catholic Church stretched itself from a Eurocentric

and monarchic worldview with claims of Catholic supremacy to the American alternative

of democracy, religious freedom, and the separation of church and state. By doing this,

the Church experienced the tension of being Catholic and universal while American and

1 Sigmund Freud’s choice of a title for his Civilization and its Discontents has been alluring to

many. A variety of writers have borrowed the last part of Freud’s title and have added it to a

number of subjects, such as Globalization and its discontents and so forth.

3

national at the same time.

In relation to modernity, the Church stretched itself from viewing the modern world as an

enemy to be fought and conquered to befriending modernity and designing some specific

accommodations to it. Particularly challenging in this milieu was the phenomenon of

secularization in its multiple manifestations.

In these three relationships, there was indeed a shift, but not at all a clean break. Instead a

stretch occurred, acknowledging a lived intra-Catholic tension between religious

exclusivism and inclusivism, between a universal Catholic identity and Catholic

inculturation in America (and in other cultures), and between the immutability of

Catholic eternal truths and their translatability into the new languages offered by the

modern world. In all this the Second Vatican Council was the major catalyst. For all three

cases the Chicago Parliaments of Religions serve as environments conducive to the

raising of important questions about Catholic identity, the Catholic understanding of non-

Catholics, and Catholic interfaith relations.

The story of the Roman Catholic community and the Chicago Parliaments of Religions

has many centers in space and time: the new and the old worlds, Chicago and Rome, the

years 1893 and 1993, and key milestones of the century in between, primarily the Anti-

Modernist controversy within Catholicism, and the Second Vatican Council.

Planted as one among many in the soil of the United States of America, the New

Promised Land, the Catholic community received an invitation to come together with

American faith communities and others from around the world for the 1893 World’s

Parliament of Religions, the first event of its kind in the history of humanity. The leaders

of our community had reasons to say “yes” to this invitation. They also had good and

many reasons to say “no.” But –despite its internal diversity of opinions on the matter of

participating—they chose to say “yes”. Thus our community came to stand with

unfamiliar company, on uncommon ground, and it took part in the dawning of the global

conversation among the religions of the world. This global interfaith movement had the

potential to inaugurate an era of humility, justice and peace in a world tired of arrogance,

4

injustice, and violence. There were those in the community who marveled at the

launching of the interfaith conversation, and others who resented it greatly as mingling

with heretics and idolaters.

When news about this affair reached the members of the community in the Old World, it

met with contrasting reactions. There were those who marveled at what had happened by

the shore of Lake Michigan and wanted to bring it to the banks of the Seine. There were

also those who were irritated by the behavior of our community in the New World and

despised what had taken place. When the idea of having a similar interfaith gathering in

the Old World began to take shape, they disagreed on what was best, so the matter was

brought to the attention of the Vatican.

News and concerns about the gathering of religions in the New World had already

reached the Vatican through a cautionary appraisal of the Papal Apostolic Delegate in the

United States. The matter was temporarily settled when Pope Leo XIII signed an

admonition advising that, while those meetings had been tolerated so far, it was advisable

not to take part in such gatherings of religions anymore unless they were convened and

hosted by officially appointed representatives of the Church. Exposure to the variety of

trees and fruits offered in the public garden provided by inter-religious gatherings was

seen as dangerous for the health of the community. After all, there was only One Vine

from which the community could be fed.2 Thus the community abstained from taking

part with other communities in many such gatherings for the next seventy years.

Pope Leo XIII saw the prospect of a Parliament of Religions in Paris as a symptom of a

much larger threat –modernity, which favored reason over faith, science over religion,

individual freedom over obedience, and innovation over tradition. To protect itself, the

Vatican issued documents and armored the community with a strategic plan to safeguard

its invaluable and timeless treasures from the surrounding dangers. This was a time of

great vigilance and fear in the life of the community. A holy war against the enemy

2 John 15: 1-7.

5

outside was made of holy battles against the likely infiltration of the enemy inside the

community’s fortress, because, it was feared, not all the members of the community

shared negative views about modernity. As a result, the Vatican thought it necessary to

monitor closely the community and examine its own officers, testing their loyalty and

disciplining or expelling them if necessary. According to the Vatican, some important

casualties were inevitable (although very painful) for the sake of doctrinal orthodoxy,

which was also the guarantee for the unity of the community.

With the passing of time, Pope John XXIII assumed the papal office. He did not perceive

modernity to be as dangerous and pernicious as his predecessors had thought. Modernity

was slowly taking over the world and the community had to reassess its position in

relation to this new situation. The fierce battle against innovation did not prevent some

workers of the vineyard from savoring new wine and trusting that the refreshing new

vintage flowed from the same Eternal Vine. So Pope John XXIII convened the second

Vatican Council, calling on leaders of the community from all the ends of the earth to

sample the new wine, make more, and sew fresh wineskins to pour it into, as the Synoptic

Gospels suggest,3 so that everybody in the community, from East and West and from

North and South, could drink it. And in the community there were those who marveled at

the great deeds of Vatican II and those who resented them greatly.

A cause and a consequence of Vatican II was the global interfaith movement, which had

continued despite the official absence of the community during the previous seventy

years. In Vatican II the community not only acknowledged other legitimate branches of

the Great Vine but recognized that other ancient trees bore true and good fruits in the

public garden of religious diversity. So, with Vatican II, the community became an

official interlocutor in the global process of interfaith dialogue.

In more recent times Pope John Paul II came from the eastern confines of the Old World

to occupy the throne of St. Peter in the Eternal City and, as the pastor of the universal

3 Mark 2: 22; Matthew 9: 17; Luke 5: 37-38.

6

Church, he set out on a journey to the very edges of the world. There he met with

members of the religions of the world, a world confronted as much as ever by injustice

and violence. In the hope of launching a truce in the face of the new millennium, he

extended an invitation to the leaders of the religions of the world to gather not far from

the Eternal City, in the little town of the beloved Poverello, Saint Francis of Assisi, the

one who called the sun his brother, the moon his sister, and who wanted to become

himself an instrument of peace. The leaders were invited there to pray together, but

separately in their respective traditions, for peace in the world. And there were those in

the community who marveled at the great interfaith deeds of John Paul II, and others who

resented them greatly.

In the meantime, Chicago –like many other cities in the United States—had been

transformed by waves of immigrants into a reservoir of the most diverse religions of the

world. When the centennial of the first Parliament of Religions approached,

conversations began in Chicago and elsewhere on planning a centennial commemoration.

The community once again received an invitation to take part. The leaders of the

community again had reasons to say “yes.” They also had good reasons to say “no.” The

community was now the largest religion in both the United States of America and in the

world and had no need of any springboard from which to assert its position. Furthermore,

the commemoration was largely an affair organized by the smaller religious minorities of

Chicago, with which the community had very little to do. There were also other pressing

issues for the community at the time, as it tried to distill the new wine of Vatican II on

American soil. But–despite all this—the community chose to say “yes” and again stand

with unfamiliar company on uncommon ground. Thus the community became part of the

centennial celebration of the Parliament of the World’s Religions. In taking the form of

one among many, the community could be understood to be humbling itself in an

inspiring emulation of its Master who “emptied himself, taking the form of a servant.”4

But it did so not without internal tension about contrasting views regarding Catholic

4 Philippians 2: 6-11.

7

identity and the role of the Church in the religious public square offered by the 1993

Parliament.

The 1993 Chicago centennial provided an opportunity for the community to test its

capacity to retain its unity in the teeth of its own internal diversity while taking part in the

most diverse religious public square the world had ever seen. It was also an opportunity

for the community to test its skills and wisdom vis-à-vis religious diversity at large. After

all, diversity was vividly characteristic of the community and it had always been thus. In

fact, the community was made of diversity. Diversity was so essential to it that in its early

years the community managed to bridge the ancient pre-Socratic abyss between oneness

and multiplicity in regards to the origin of the universe by embracing the One God

Creator as a Trinity of Divine Persons. The community also had a millenary history of

diversifying the object of its devotion through the veneration of God’s friends, whom the

community associated with the most diverse themes and causes, as the polytheistic

communities used to do from time immemorial. But all this the community managed to

do within a monotheistic framework, a symbol of its own unity in the midst of its own

internal diversity. Hence the community had enough resources to be reminded of the

goodness of its own internal diversity and to process the extraordinary religious diversity

displayed at the 1993 Centennial commemoration of the many religions.

Together with its own internal diversity in the midst of the larger religious diversity,

other important issues were at stake in Catholic participation in the Chicago Parliaments

of Religions. These included: the meaning and extension of Catholic identity; the relation

between faith and culture, specifically between the Catholic Church and American

culture; the relation between tradition and modernity, continuities and discontinuities in

the face of change; the implications of the Church’s exposure to the religious public

square; the need for a contextual Catholic theology of religions; and alternative forms of

Catholic interfaith engagement. Catholics needed to agree on skills for living with the

“golden rule” of religious freedom: the willingness to grant other religions the rights

demanded for one’s own. Of primary concern was the Catholic factor in American

religious history and in the global interfaith movement. As exemplified in the relation

8

between the Catholic Church and the Chicago Parliaments of Religions, American

religious pluralism cannot overlook the active and growing presence of the Catholic

Church as a major player in the shaping of American religious identity. On the other

hand, the Catholic Church cannot be fully rooted in modern America without

acknowledging and embracing the reality of religious diversity. Similarly at the global

level, the global interfaith movement cannot authentically be interfaith and global without

the committed and active participation of the Roman Catholic Church. Nor can the

Church’s mission in the modern world be actualized without respectful and genuine

dialogue with people of other religions.

Many have written about the 1893 and 1993 Chicago Parliaments of Religions, the global

interfaith movement they fostered, and the most important aims they envisioned in an age

of globalized religion. Many have written about Catholic modern history, the modern

Papacy, the anti-Modernist controversy, and the second Vatican Council. Much has also

been written about the impact Vatican II had on the Catholic Church in the United States

of America. However, very few have paid attention to the intercourse between the

Catholic Church and the two great gatherings of religions by the shore of Lake

Michigan.5

I first became aware of the Chicago Parliaments of Religions when I was a graduate

student in Washington, DC, precisely at the time of the 1993 centennial Parliament. But I

did not need to be in Chicago to have a glimpse of what was taking place in the Windy

City. Driving from the White House north on Washington’s 16th

Street, NW, passing

5 Among the 1893 Parliament scholars, Richard Seager and Eric Ziolkowski stand out. Marcus

Braybrooke has also a major role in crafting a niche for the 1893 Parliament as the catalyst for the

modern interfaith movement. Regarding modern Catholic history, the list is vast, but Hubert

Jedin’s multi-volume History of the Church stands out as a balanced and comprehensive editorial

project, with a historicist methodological approach, a very helpful general reference resource. On

the impact of Vatican II on America, the list is also large, but the works of Mark Massa, Michael

Cuneo, and the editorial efforts of Margaret O’Brien Steinfelds and Peter Steinfelds have been

particularly helpful to the present writer. In relation to Catholic involvement in the 1893

Parliament, James Cleary stands in solitude. For details, see general bibliography and the

historiography essay that serves as its introduction.

9

many different houses of worship, was already an exposure to the religious diversity the

Chicago Parliament was all about. For a Catholic young man, born and raised by the

shore of Maracaibo’s lake in Venezuela, the religious diversity around the Potomac River

was mind-boggling. A few years later I found myself immersed in a veritable parliament

of religions while I studied for a Master of Divinity at Harvard University. Harvard

Divinity School included participants from more than fifty different religious affiliations.

This laboratory of religious diversity helped pave the way for my work as the director of

the Canadian Churches’ Forum for Global Ministries and later as the first interfaith

liaison officer of the Canadian Council of Churches, both located in Toronto. At the

Forum I conducted interfaith educational visits to different religious venues in the Greater

Toronto area. At the Council I was responsible for a feasibility study on the establishment

of an interfaith reference group. The study included interviewing the interfaith liaison

officers of all the member churches of the Council across Canada. Its results were

published in book form as a bilingual report entitled Who is My Neighbour?6

More recently, my doctoral studies on the interface of globalization, religion, and

education set me on a journey around the world with a focus on Asia, the results of which

I later presented at the V Parliament of the World’s Religions in Melbourne, Australia, in

December 2009. This provided me with first hand exposure to the Parliament of

Religions experience. A semester as a visiting student at the Institute for Interdisciplinary

Studies of Religions and Cultures at the Pontifical Gregorian University in Rome

prepared the way for my research work in the Propaganda Fide Archives and the Secret

Archives in the Vatican, which was followed by research in Chicago in the Archives of

the Council for a Parliament of the World’s Religions. Both consultations were for me an

immersion in the two primary foci of this study.

As the largest religious organization, and one of the oldest still standing in the

contemporary religious demographics of the planet, the Catholic Church’s willingness or

6 Carlos Hugo Parra-Pirela, Who is my Neighbor? (Toronto: Canadian Council of Churches,

2010).

10

reticence to engage other faiths in a spirit of good will continues to matter in terms of

humanity’s prospects for religious freedom, respect for diversity and global peace. The

Catholic Church’s involvement in the Chicago Parliaments of Religions offers a unique

case study of Catholic involvement in the religious public square. It is on this intersection

that this study intends to shed light with the hope of raising awareness not only of what

has already been accomplished in the most important and critical field of Catholic

interfaith relations, but also of what still remains to be achieved.

11

“Can the Church afford not to be there?”

The decision of the American Archbishops to allow the participation of the Catholic

Church in the World’s Parliament of Religions of 1893 in Chicago was a bold initiative

with groundbreaking and multifaceted implications for the Church. At stake were the

most relevant issues of acknowledging other religions, tacitly endorsing religious

freedom, exposing the Church to open scrutiny in the American religious public square,

exercising autonomy in regards to the Vatican, managing internal tensions in the face of

the greater tension between the Church and the American context, and working

cooperatively with Protestants to stage the first global forum of the religions of the world.

The bottom-line of the Archbishops’ decision was to demonstrate to Americans and

perhaps to the Church itself the compatibility between the Catholic faith and American

democracy. This did not go unopposed either within Church circles or among anti-

Catholic nativists. For all this, the fourth Columbian centenary and the Chicago World’s

Fair to celebrate it, within which the Parliament of Religions was organized, offered the

Church an unparalleled opportunity to manifest its place in America. Under the umbrella

of the World’s Fair, the Church organized a major Catholic Educational Exhibit, ran a

conference (The Columbian Catholic Congress) under the auspices of the World’s

Congress Auxiliary, and, in particular, participated in the Parliament of Religions, a key

moment in the accommodation of the Catholic Church in America and one that ironically

both made the Catholic Church a player at the dawning of the modern global interfaith

movement and helped close the Catholic door to the same movement for nearly seventy

years.

This chapter covers a span of four years, from the moment the idea of a Parliament of

Religions was first posed in 1889 to the conclusion of the Columbian Catholic Congress,

two days before the inauguration of the Parliament of Religions. It is divided into three

main sections: the origin and development of the idea of a Parliament of Religions and

the first steps towards Catholic involvement, the decision of the American Archbishops

12

to endorse Catholic participation, and a focus on Chicago, the host city of the Parliament

and of the Catholic events organized at the Fair prior to the Parliament of Religions.

Towards the World’s Parliament of Religions in Chicago

The idea of a global gathering of religions and associated religious congresses was first

conceived by Charles Carroll Bonney, a Chicago lawyer and a layman of the Church of

the New Jerusalem, also known as the Swedenborgian Church. According to Bonney, the

idea resulted from the great expectation surrounding the choice of Chicago as the site for

a World’s Fair to commemorate the fourth centenary of Christopher Columbus’ arrival in

the New World. “While thinking about the nature and proper characteristics of this great

undertaking,” Bonney wrote, “there came into my mind the idea of a comprehensive and

well-organized Intellectual and Moral Exposition of the Progress of Mankind, to be held

in connection with the proposed display of material forms.” Bonney penned a proposal

for such a gathering on September 20, 1889 and it was published in The Statesman the

following month.

The crowning glory of the World’s Fair of 1892 should not be the exhibit then to

be made of the material triumphs, industrial achievements, and mechanical

victories of man, however magnificent that display may be. Something higher and

nobler is demanded by the enlightened and progressive spirit of the present age.

In connection with that important event, the world of government, jurisprudence,

finance, science, literature, education, and religion should be represented in a

Congress of statesmen, jurists, financiers, scientists, literati, teachers, and

theologians, greater in numbers and more widely representative of “peoples,

nations, and tongues” than any other assemblage which has ever yet been

convened1

In proposing a global congress on humanistic and social issues, Bonney intended a series

of events that would transcend the merely material and industrial nature of the great

Exposition. The idea was well received and on October 15, 1889 a general committee of

1 Charles Carroll Bonney, “The Genesis of the World’s Religious Congresses of 1893,” The New-

Church Review, (January 1894): 79, in Archives of the Council for a Parliament of the World’s

Religions (ACPWR), Box 21A, Research Committee Essays, File: Bonney.

13

organization was appointed with Bonney as chairman. One year later, on October 30,

1890, the World’s Congress Auxiliary of the World’s Columbian Exposition was formed

with Bonney as president. While the Chicago World’s Exposition itself was envisioned as

a major learning event with its own socio-anthropological displays of evolutionist theory

and technological achievements,2 the task of the World’s Congress Auxiliary was to

bring together experts from various fields of knowledge. The Auxiliary organized more

than two hundred congresses from May 15 to October 28, 1893 on the most varied of

subjects –the economy, society, politics, education, and the arts.3 These congresses,

pioneers of the modern professional conferences, offered a platform for knowledge

exchange. It is also clear that in Bonney’s original plan, religion was just one among

many subjects he wished to see addressed. However, as the overall plan of the congresses

unfolded, the Congress of religions began to stand out from the rest.

It was originally believed that a gathering of the religions of the world at the Chicago

World Exposition would be the first ever of its kind. Nevertheless, as the word of the

Congress began to spread, memories of previous ecumenical initiatives surfaced,

including the Pan-Buddhist Congress convened by the Mauryan Emperor Ashoka in

Palatiputra (today Patna), India in about 250 BCE. Also recalled was an inter-religious

House of Worship established by Mughal Emperor Akbar the Great in Fatehpur Sikri,

India, in the last quarter of the 16th

century CE and immortalized in Alfred Tennyson’s

poem “Akbar’s Dream.” More recently there were proposals for such a gathering from

people and institutions as varied as John Comenius, W. F. Warren, the President of

Boston University, the Free Religious Association of Boston, and Chinese writers and

poets.4 Comparisons were also made with the Ecumenical Christian Council of Nicaea in

2 John P. Burris, Exhibiting Religion, Colonialism and Spectacle at International Expositions

1851-1893 (Charlottesville: University Press of Virginia, 2001), xix-xx.

3 Walter Houghton, editor, Neely’s History of the Parliament of Religions and Religious

Congresses of the World’s Columbian Exposition: Compiled from Original Manuscripts and

Stenographic Reports (Chicago: F. T. Neely, 1894), 19.

4 John Henry Barrows, editor, The World’s Parliament of Religions, an illustrated and popular

story of the World’s First Parliament of Religions held in Chicago in connections with the

14

325 CE and a Paris gathering of men representing various religions during the French

Revolution, all suggested as forerunners of the proposed “council on the shore of Lake

Michigan, a rehearsal of faiths.”5 However, Max Müller –the most famous absentee of

the Parliament -6 refuted such comparisons, specifically the ones related to Ashoka, the

Council of Nicaea, and Akbar, as taking great liberties with historical facts. To this

Oxford scholar, “the Parliament of Religions at Chicago stands unique, unprecedented in

the whole history of the world.”7 Parliament critic Clay Lancaster adds that “the Chicago

Parliament differed from its predecessors in that it issued invitations to participants all

over the earth, and its doors were open to the general public.”8

The momentum that began to build up around the Parliament idea certainly engaged the

imagination of Bonney, who saw himself as the original instrument to bring the Congress

to fruition, tracing back his preparation for the task to his Sunday school years as a

religious pupil, his association with the Church of the New Jerusalem and its inclusive

tenets regarding other religions, and his acquaintance with members and ministers of

many different faith groups in the religiously diverse, though mostly Christian,

environment of late 19th

century Chicago. As a first step, Bonney established a General

Committee on Religious Congresses and appointed the Rev. John Henry Barrows, a

gifted Presbyterian minister and pastor of the First Presbyterian Church in Chicago, as its

Columbian Exposition of 1893, Volume I (Chicago: Parliament Publishing Company, 1893), 8-

10.

5 Richard Henry Savage, “Origin of the Parliament of Religions,” in Neely’s History of the

Parliament of Religions, ed. Houghton, 22. The writer has not been able to identify the Paris

event during the French Revolution.

6 Eric Ziolkowski, editor, A Museum of Faiths: Histories and Legacies of the 1893 World’s

Parliament of Religions (Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1993), 55. 7 Friedrich Max Müller, ‘”The Real Significance of the Parliament of Religions” (1894), in A

Museum of Faiths, ed. Ziolkowski, 151-153, 154.

8 Clay Lancaster, Incredible World’s Parliament of Religions at the Chicago Columbian

Exposition of 1893: A Comparative and Critical Study (Fontwell: Diane Pub Co., 1987), 26.

15

chair, a commitment that Barrows accepted on December 31, 1889. According to

Bonney, Barrows “very soon proved his marvelous fitness for the great task entrusted to

him, and devoted his energies to it with a tireless energy that assured success.”9

Barrows was likely the one who came up with the term “parliament” to refer to the event

entrusted to his planning, a word probably suggested to him by Tennyson’s line: “In the

Parliament of man, the federation of the world.”10

The term ‘parliament’ clearly

differentiated and singled out the event, originally designated as the Union Congress,

from the other, smaller and separate denominational congresses scheduled by the General

Committee on Religious Congresses to take place in the context of the World’s Fair

before, during and after the interfaith event. Barrows embraced the Parliament as a once-

in-a-life-time opportunity that he felt changed the course of his life. Others agreed. The

Rev. Alfred Momerie praised Barrows at the Parliament’s close. “As chairman of this

first Parliament of Religions he has won immortal glory, which I fancy nothing in the

future can very much augment.”11

But all Barrows’ efforts would not have been enough without the Chicago World

Exhibition. The Parliament of Religions would likely never have crystallized outside of

the framework provided by the World’s Fair. Despite the implications and complexities

of “exhibiting religion,”12

the fact that the founding sponsor of the Parliament was a

secular organization seemed to initially provide a neutral ground making it easier for the

different religions to accept the invitation to gather, even though the event’s underlying

9 Bonney, “The Genesis,” 74-78, 81, 84.

10 Mary Eleanor Barrows, John Henry Barrows: A Memoir (Chicago: Fleming H. Revell

Company, 1904), 253.

11 Houghton, Neely’s History of the Parliament of Religions, 847.

12 Burris, Exhibiting Religions, xiv-xviii.

16

agenda, at least in the minds of its American organizers, would advance what was for

them a given, the supremacy of Christianity.13

The spirit of religious freedom in America and the notion of America as a free market of

ideas also contributed to the Parliament’s feasibility. The Parliament initiative was

certainly original to the Chicago Exhibition as no previous world’s fair had ever included

religion in their catalogues. A proposal for a congress of Protestants of all nations in the

context of Britain’s Great Exhibition in 1851 never materialized. A proposed display of

Bibles in 130 languages, planned for the Crystal Palace, also failed to take place. But that

did not mean religion was absent from the 1851 Exhibition. The Bibles were eventually

displayed near an exhibition of printing machines and it was reported that almost 400,000

Bibles were distributed or sold throughout the London event. Moreover, in addition to

Christian worship services conducted in English, Church services in foreign languages

were arranged for visiting Protestants, and the Archbishop of Canterbury, the Primate of

the Church of England, officially sanctioned the 1851 Great Exhibition by attending the

opening ceremony. Of course, the idea that Catholics might be invited to participate

alongside Protestants was totally out of the question.14

First steps towards Catholic involvement

The situation in the United States was different. Not only was a Parliament of

Religions possible, but the event became one of the highlights of the Chicago Exhibition.

As Alfred Momerie stated at the closing of the Parliament, “I have seen all the great

exhibitions of Europe during the last fifteen years, and I can safely say that the World’s

Columbian Exposition is greater than all of them put together, and the Parliament of

13 John Henry Barrows, editor, The World’s Parliament of Religions, an illustrated and popular

story of the World’s First Parliament of Religions held in Chicago in connections with the

Columbian Exposition of 1893, Volume II (Chicago: Parliament Publishing Company, 1893),

1581.

14 Burris, Exhibiting Religion, 49-53.

17

Religions is, in my opinion, greater than the exposition.”15

The situation was also

different regarding the involvement of Catholics who –despite historic tensions with

Protestants- were not only welcomed, but deliberately courted to attend by the

Parliament’s Protestant organizers. Bonney’s ecumenical spirit and his idea of a

Parliament of Religions definitely included the Catholic Church. His favorable attitude

towards Catholics was portrayed in a story he told about a fire that destroyed a little

Catholic Church in south Chicago and how the Protestants of the neighborhood got

together to support the rebuilding of the Catholic Church. This he used “as an illustration

of the essential principle on which was organized the World’s Parliament of

Religions,”16

which was one of cooperation and mutual support beyond individual

differences.

For his part, Barrows knew from the earliest stages of planning that the involvement of

the Roman Catholic Church was critical if Christianity was to be fully represented and

the Parliament was to live up to its universal claims. As his daughter recalled, “the

participation of the Roman Catholic Church was also of supreme moment, since an

invitation to the Pagan world issued merely by Protestant Christianity would have

comparatively little weight.” Barrows’ personal attitude towards the Church of Rome was

mixed. As a young traveler in Rome he dismissed the Catholic veneration of images as

superstition and quoted Luther referring to the Eternal City as the second Babylon.

Furthermore, the living conditions and lack of democratic traditions in Catholic countries

he visited did not make a positive impression on him. But, his decade as a pastor in

Chicago made him recognize that “the lower elements of the population can be restrained

from anarchy only by the priests” and he was certainly impressed by Catholic leaders like

Henry Cardinal Manning, the Archbishop of Westminster, “who was mourned by

millions of England’s poor, and whose Christianity was greater than his cardinal’s hat

15 Houghton, Neely’s History of the Parliament of Religions, 22.

16 Charles Carroll Bonney, “The Religious Parliament Idea, A True Story of an Orthodox

Example,” The Open Court, A Monthly Magazine, 14, 9 (September 1901): 515.

18

and more divine than his princely office.” Eventually, Barrows would exalt the quality

and openness of Catholics in America as opposed to Europe.17

In addition to extending an invitation to Catholics so as to sustain the historic character of

Christianity at the Parliament and the global claims of the event, in the American context

the absence of the Catholic Church from the Parliament would have signaled a myopic

divorce between the Parliament initiative and American demographics. The 1890 US

Census revealed that the Catholic population had dramatically multiplied from just

25,000 in 1790 and 1,200,000 in 1840 to become the largest religious denomination in

the United States in 1890: 6,231, 000, followed by Methodists Episcopal (2,240,000),

Regular Baptists –colored (1,362,000), Regular Baptists-South (1,308,000), and

Methodists Episcopal -South (1,210,000). Protestants, taken as a whole, greatly

outnumbered Catholics. But given the theological, class, and racial divisions that

characterized American Protestantism, Catholics, at approximately ten percent of the total

American population, represented a major American faith community. Furthermore,

when it came to the value of property, the census revealed that the Catholic Church also

stood first with $118,000,000, followed by Methodists Episcopal ($97,000,000),

Protestants Episcopal ($81,000,000), Northern Presbyterians (74,000,000) and Southern

Baptists (49,000,000).18

Since Chicago was the cradle of the Parliament idea, it was the Catholic leadership in

Chicago that the organizers of the Parliament approached. His Grace the Most Rev.

Patrick Augustine Feehan, the first Archbishop of Chicago, was appointed member of the

Committee of Organization on Religious Congresses chaired by Barrows and which also

17 Barrows, John Henry Barrows, 256, 103, 232, 257.

18 These figures were actually presented at the Parliament of Religions on its 14

th day by the Rev.

Dr. H. K. Carroll of New York. See H. K. Carroll, “The Present Religious Condition of

America,” in The World’s Parliament, II, ed. Barrows, 1162-1165.

19

included local religious leaders from various Protestant denominations. It also included

Rabbi Emil G. Hirsch of the Jewish “Church” in Chicago, as it was called by Bonney.19

Feehan was a zealous bishop. He first arrived in Chicago in 1880 to confront the ruins of

the great Chicago fire and an increasingly diversified demographic landscape with

Catholic immigrants arriving from central and southern Europe. He was instrumental not

only in rebuilding but also in expanding the Catholic Church in Chicago. By the time he

was invited to join in the planning of the Parliament,20

Feehan, admired for his warmth

and openness, was celebrating the Silver Jubilee of his priestly ordination, an occasion

where he was honored for his accomplishments. “Archbishop Feehan has been unceasing

in his good work since his arrival in Chicago. In nine years, he has regularly visited his

diocese, traveling by railroads and wagon roads wherever his services were needed, and

thus it was that he had confirmed over one hundred thousand persons; ordained one

hundred and seventy-five priests, and had lid [sic] the cornerstone of sixty churches;

dedicated seventy-two, and invariably seconded the labors of his priests in all their

undertakings.”21

While his pastoral priorities would prevent Bishop Feehan from being

personally involved in the specific work and demands of the Parliament planning,22

his

presence together with other Catholic prelates on the presiding platform during the

opening ceremony of the Parliament of Religions underscored his personal support of the

event.

19 Bonney, “The Genesis,” 81.

20 Barrows, John Henry Barrows, 309.

21 100 years: The History of the Church of the Holy Name, the chapel that became a Cathedral

and the Story of Catholicism in Chicago (Chicago: Published by the Cathedral of the Holy Name,

1949), 167 leaves, n.p.

22 James Cleary reports from the correspondence at the University of Notre Dame Manuscript

Collections that “Barrows complained to William Onahan that Feehan was too busy to meet with

the committee.” James Cleary, “Catholic Participation in the World’s Parliament of Religions,”

The Catholic Historical Review, 55, 4 (1970): 589.

20

Feehan’s support was a clear example of endorsement at the local level. In the minds of

its local organizers, however, the Parliament was meant to be an event of global

proportions. In June 1891 Barrows issued a preliminary invitation to the world. More

than 3,000 letters of invitation were sent to 30 different countries. Eight months later, on

February 25, 1892, he wrote the first report on the interest his invitation generated.

Barrows eventually reported that “for thirty months nearly all the railroads and steamship

lines of the world were unconsciously working for the Parliament of Religions.” He got

replies in Chinese, Japanese, Hindustani, Greek, Armenian, Latin, Italian, French,

Spanish, German, Norwegian, Bohemian, Polish and English. 23

Barrows’ worldwide outreach included the Vatican. Barrows took the liberty of writing

directly to Cardinal Mariano Rampolla del Tindaro, the Vatican Secretary of State, on

March 17, 1892, on the occasion of a public pronouncement from Pope Leo XIII

referring very favorably to the upcoming “festival of nations” in Chicago. In his letter,

Barrows addressed Rampolla as “my dear Brother in Christ,” and presented to the

Secretary of State a copy of his report on the Parliament project containing supportive

references from several Catholic prelates. Barrows also indicated to Rampolla his own

desire that the ultimate outcome of the Parliament would be the reunion of Christendom.

Finally, Barrows requested that his report be brought to the attention of the Pope in the

hope that the Pontiff might issue a letter “commending this fraternal effort to bring

mankind together, as he in his kindness and wisdom may be disposed to offer us.”24

While the Pope did not issue the letter requested by Barrows, it remains to be explored if

and to what degree Barrows’ petition helped spark the Pontiff’s subsequent encyclical

letter Praeclara Gratulationis Publicae, issued on the occasion of the Pope’s Episcopal

Jubilee, offering its own vision of the reunion of Christendom. There was, however, a

notable difference between what Barrows requested and the papal letter. Barrows’

23 Barrows, The World’s Parliament, I, 10, 15, 59.

24 Barrows to Rampolla, March 17, 1892. Archivio Segreto Vaticano (ASV), Segretaria di Stato

(SS), 1896, Rubric 262, Fasc. 4, p. 92, n. 9593.

21

underlying agenda for the Parliament was to show the triumph of Christianity over all

other forms of religious expressions, an ecumenical Christianity infused by Protestantism.

The Papal encyclical also presented a triumphal Christianity but as articulated by Rome.

The Pope’s letter sought “to bind every nation and people more closely to Himself, and

make manifest everywhere the salutary influence of the See of Rome,” where the

Successor of Peter and Vicar of Christ holds “upon this earth the place of God

Almighty.”25

Despite Barrows’ attempts to cast his net widely in the vast Catholic sea, the most

strategic endorsement from the Catholic ranks Barrows needed for the Chicago

Parliament was not from the Vatican. It was from Baltimore, the see of James Cardinal

Gibbons. Gibbons was the most prominent and among the most influential Catholic

leaders in the United States. He was elevated to the rank of cardinal one year after the

death of his only predecessor holding that ecclesiastical dignity in the United States, John

Cardinal McCloskey from New York. Gibbons exercised his leadership of the Catholic

Church during very controversial times inside the Church concerning the relation

between Catholic identity and American citizenship. The Cardinal was regarded as

favoring Catholic engagement with social issues. He was, for example, seen as

sympathetic to the struggles of labor and social reform. Given the Cardinal’s willingness

to embrace the challenges posed by the American reality to the Catholic Church, Barrows

hoped he could count on Gibbons’ support for the Parliament. However, Barrows did not

take it for granted. His daughter’s recollections from the fall of 1892 noted:

During the months of silence that succeeded his dispatching a letter to Cardinal

Gibbons, so frequently did my father impress upon his children the importance of

his receiving the desired answer, that whenever he sat lost I thought, we used to

exclaim, “He must be willing the Cardinal!” And we were not far wrong. The

letter that finally came ran thus:

25 Pope Leo XIII, Encyclical Letter “Praeclara Gratulationis Publicae,” (On the Reunion of

Christendom), June 20, 1894, in The Great Encyclical Letters of Pope Leo XIII, translations from

approved sources, with Preface by Rev. John J. Wynne, s.j. (New York: Benziger Brothers,

1903), 304.

22

‘Judged by the tenor of the Preliminary address of the General Committee on

Religious Congresses in connection with the Exposition of 1893, I deem the

movement you are engaged in promoting worthy of all encouragement and praise.

Assuredly a congress of eminent men gathered together to declare, as your

address sets forth, what they have to offer or suggest for the world’s betterment,

what light religion has to throw on the labor problems, the educational questions,

and the perplexing social conditions of our times cannot but result in good to our

common country. I rejoice accordingly to learn that the project for a Religious

Congress in Chicago in 1893 has already won the sympathies and enlisted the

active cooperation of those in the front rank of human thought and progress even

in other lands than ours. If conducted with moderation and good will such a

congress may result, by the blessing of divine providence, in benefits far more

reaching than the most sanguine would dare to hope for.’

Another high profile Catholic leader who supported the Parliament idea was Archbishop

John Ireland of St. Paul, Minnesota. Like Gibbons, Ireland was an influential advocate

for the compatibility of the Catholic faith and the American spirit of freedom, democracy

and social change. In a letter to Barrows, Ireland stated: “I promise my active cooperation

in the work [of the Parliament]. The conception of such a religious assembly seems

almost like an inspiration.”26

Furthermore, on the occasion of the inauguration of the

World’s Congress Auxiliary, on October 21, 1892, Ireland delivered a public speech

titled the “Address on Human Progress,” in which he spoke positively of the Parliament

of Religions.

The primordial truths regarding the Supreme God will be confessed by all who

take part in the Congress; and is it not much that those truths be today proclaimed

in solemn conclave by representatives of the nations of the earth during the

greatest exposition the world has ever known? As to those principles of religion

upon which the members of the Congress may not be of one mind, they who hold

the truth need not fear. Truth is not timid, and, upon an occasion so great and

important, should not truth court publicity in order to be known and better loved?

No discussion, no controversy will be allowed during the sessions of the

Congress; the one purpose of the Congress will be to set forth calmly and

dispassionately the confessions of faith and labors of religion at the present

time.27

26 Barrows, John Henry Barrows, 257.

27 Cited by Frederick J. Zwierlein in The Life and Letters of Bishop McQuaid, Vol. III (Rochester,

The Art Print Shop, 1927), 236-237.

23

But the encouragement of the Cardinal of Baltimore and the Archbishop of St. Paul did

not automatically mean active involvement in the Parliament by the larger American

Catholic hierarchy. The matter had to be brought before the Board of the Catholic

Archbishops for deliberations and approval. In the event, the intervention of Bishop John

Keane, the Rector of the Catholic University of America in Washington, DC, would be

decisive. Sharing convictions similar to those of Gibbons and Ireland and persuaded by

the latter to get involved in the Parliament, Keane made himself available to look into the

matter although he had previously declined an invitation from the World’s Congress

Auxiliary to become a member of the Advisory Committee on Religious Missions.28

He

wrote a letter that would be crucial in the discernment of the Archbishops regarding

Catholic participation in the Parliament.

The decision of the Catholic Church to participate

On November 16, 1892, the Third Annual Conference of the Archbishops of the United

States was held at the residence of the Archbishop of New York, with all the

Metropolitans present with the exception of Archbishop Ireland of St. Paul, Minnesota,

who was represented by his Vicar General, and Archbishop Salpointe of Santa Fe, New

Mexico, represented by his Coadjutor. The Parliament of Religions was on the agenda,

which–according to the minutes—was raised for discussion toward the end of the

morning session:

A letter from [Keane,] the Rt. Rev. Rector of the Catholic University of America

to the Board of Archbishops was read. He informed them that the President of a

committee empowered by the directors of the Columbian Exposition to organize a

Congress or parliament of Religions, with the view of bringing together

representatives of the principal forms of religion, who would fairly and freely

expose without discussion or controversy their various tenets, had requested that

the Board of Archbishops make provision for the representing of the Catholic

Church at this important gathering. The Bishop was assured that those engaged in

28 Patrick Henry Ahern, The Catholic University of America 1887-1896, The Rectorship of John

J. Keane (Washington, DC: The Catholic University of America Press, 1948), 67.

24

forming this Congress, desire to shape matters in every way so as to meet the

wishes of the Archbishops in regard to it. An adjournment was here taken.29

In his letter Keane encouraged the Archbishops to ponder carefully the importance and

likely implications of Catholic participation in the Parliament project: “I beg leave to

venture the opinion that, while the objections against the proposal are obvious, the

reasons in favor of it seem paramount.” Further, he added that it was not in the power of

the Church to hinder the Parliament from taking place, and then he articulated a poignant

question: “Can the Catholic Church afford not to be there?”30

In other words, it might be

better for the Church if there was no Parliament. But since the Parliament was going to

take place and the Archdiocese of Chicago was already involved, the Church had best

engage fully so as to ensure the outcome was to the Church’s liking.

In order to understand what was at stake in Keane’s proposal to the Archbishops and

what considerations might have gone through their minds as they heard his question, it is

necessary to frame the invitation to participate in the Parliament of Religions within the

larger context of the World’s Fair and the World’s Congress Auxiliary. The previous

items on the agenda of that morning’s session were the Catholic Educational Exhibit and

the Columbian Catholic Congress, both to be held the following year in conjunction with

the Chicago Exhibition. In fact, until that moment, the Parliament of Religions was of

minimal interest for the Catholic prelates, who were already committed to other official

Catholic involvements in the Chicago affair.

The Catholic Church in the United States was positively predisposed to the Columbian

commemoration. Pope Leo XIII issued an encyclical letter for the occasion,

unapologetically claiming ownership of the Exposition’s namesake, Columbus, and his

29 Minutes of the Third Annual Conference of the Most Reverend Archbishops of the United

States, November 16, 1892, Archivio Storico Propaganda Fide (ASPF), Nuova Serie (NS), 1893,

vol 27, p. 352. 30

Keane to the Archbishops of the United States, Washington, November 12, 1892, cited by John

Tracy Ellis, The Life of James Cardinal Gibbons, Archbishop of Baltimore, Volume II

(Milwaukee: The Bruce Publishing Company, 1952), 17-18.

25

exploratory enterprise: “Columbus is ours; since if a little consideration be given to the

particular reason of his design in exploring the mare tenebrosum, and also the manner in

which he endeavored to execute the design, it is undubitable that the Catholic faith was

the strongest motive for the inception and execution of the design; so that for this reason

also the whole human race owes not a little to the Church.”31

For American Catholics,

this ownership claim was particularly relevant at a time in which the Catholic Church was

also claiming its own place in American society. The Church’s ability to adapt to and

participate fully in American culture was seriously questioned by anti-Catholic and anti-

immigrant nativists. Many doubted it was possible for a faithful Catholic in full

allegiance to the Pope, monarch of a now landless but virtually global state, to be also a

loyal American citizen. Being Catholic and being American were perceived by many as

conflicting loyalties.

The Columbian anniversary offered an opportunity for American Catholics to reflect

upon the role of Catholicism in the history in the New World at large, the involvement of

Catholics in the history of the United States, and to show their simultaneous loyalty to

Church and state. To Catholic advocates of participation in the Chicago Exposition, the

event promised a perfect antidote to counteract the “hostilities of American nationalists

towards European immigrants,” many of whom happened to be Catholic.32

American Catholics had had a similar opportunity to assert their Catholicity on American

soil a few years before the Parliament, on the occasion of the Centennial of the

establishment of the Catholic hierarchy in the United States with John Carroll as the first

Bishop in Baltimore. Included among the solemn celebrations were a General Congress

of the Catholic Laity in the United States, held in Baltimore on November 11 and 12,

31 Pope Leo XIII, “Quarto Abeunte Saeculo,” (On the Columbus Quadricentennial), July 16,

1892, in The Great Encyclical Letters, 265.

32 John Higham, Strangers in the Land: Patterns of American Nativism, 1860-1925 (New

Brinswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 1955), xi. Among the many resources on the complex

phenomenon of nativism, for the origins of its religious dimension see Ray Allen Billington, The

Protestant crusade, 1800-1860: a study of the origins of American nativism (Gloucester, Mass:

Peter Smith, 1963).

26

1889, and the dedication and opening of the Catholic University in Washington, DC.33

The Baltimore Congress decided to convene another congress that would take place in

1892.34

It eventually became the Columbian Catholic Congress, one of many

denominational congresses held under the aegis of the World’s Congress Auxiliary

coordinated by Bonney in the context of the Chicago Exhibition. The Columbian

Catholic Congress was scheduled for Chicago immediately before but separate from the

Parliament of Religions.

The Columbian commemoration was an occasion for Catholics to assert their

“Americanity” in tandem with their Catholicity. The Columbian Centennial was seen by

some Catholic scholars as an appropriate moment for a historical inventory of Catholic

assets in American history as conveyed in a comprehensive study published by the

University of Notre Dame.35

This work was described in its preface by Maurice Francis

Egan, prominent Catholic journalist and later American Ambassador to Denmark, as a

document to hold “your title-deeds to your land.” Egan highlighted Catholic foundational

New World and American figures, such as Columbus, Bishop Las Casas, Father

Marquette, Father Jogues, and Roger Taney, the first Roman Catholic to sit on the

Supreme Court of the United States and to hold the offices of Chief Justice and Attorney

General. Egan also referred to the role of the Catholic barons of England in the

production of the Magna Carta and to a Catholic he described as “the bravest of all the

signers of the Declaration of Independence, Charles Carroll” who “helped, too, to lay the

foundation of our present freedom.” Furthermore, the Columbian commemoration gave

Egan strong arguments to claim a Catholic presence in America that preceded the arrival

of the Pilgrims. “Compared with our part in the history of America,” Egan declared, “the

33 Souvenir Volume of the Centennial Celebration and Catholic Congress, 1789-1889 (Detroit:

William H. Hughes Publisher, 1889), 114.

34 Official Report of the Proceedings of the Catholic Congress, held at Baltimore, MD, November

11th and 12

th, 1889, (Detroit: William H. Hugues, Publisher, 1889), ix.

35 The Columbian Jubilee or Four Centuries of Catholicity in America, being a Historical and

Biographical Retrospect from the Landing of Christopher Columbus to the Chicago Catholic

Congress of 1893 (Chicago, J. S. Hyland and Company, 1894), two volumes.

27

coming of the Mayflower is but an episode. And now when the world rings with the fame

of Columbus, shall we not learn to claim our own? ... Mass was said on this soil before

the spire of a meeting-house rose in Virginia, or among the New England hills. After this,

who shall dare in our presence to call America a Protestant country?”36

Egan’s apologetic discourse highlighting Catholic contributions to America stood in

contrast to statements, including scholarly voices, that questioned the Catholic role in

America – even seeing it as a barrier for social, political and economic growth. Max

Weber’s thesis that capitalism’s progress and wealth were closely linked to a Protestant

ethic of individualism and strict work discipline, associated with Protestant countries,

would be articulated by the German thinker about a decade after the Parliament.37

But

the notion that Catholic countries lagged behind in economic and social development,

echoed by Barrows after visiting Catholic Europe, had been articulated by English

historian Lord Macaulay in the years prior to the Parliament.

Whoever passes in Germany from a Roman Catholic to a Protestant principality,

in Switzerland from a Roman Catholic to a Protestant canton, in Ireland from a

Roman Catholic to a Protestant county, finds that he has passed from a lower to a

higher grade of civilization. On the other side of the Atlantic the same law

prevails. The Protestants of the United States have left far behind them the Roman

Catholics of Mexico, Peru, and Brazil. The Roman Catholics of Lower Canada

remain inert, while the whole continent round them is in a ferment with Protestant

activity and enterprise.38

English Pastor Thomas Aveling, when commenting on the Great London Exhibition,

similarly asserts that “while England was a Roman Catholic country … she remained an

36 The Columbian Jubilee, I, iv, v.

37 See Max Weber, Protestant Ethics and the Spirit of Capitalism (New York: Scribner, 1958).

First composed in 1904 and 1905.

38 Thomas Babington Macaulay, The History of England from the Accession of James II,

including The Life and Letters of Lord Macaulay, by his nephew, George Otto Trevelyan (New

York: W. M. L. Allison Publisher, 1887), 37-38. The writer is indebted to Rev. John Lee’s

correspondence in the Vatican Archives for directing his attention to Lord Macaulay. John Lee to

Pope Leo XIII, August 24, 1894, ASPF, NS, Vol. 36, p. 65.

28

inferior political power…”39

The notion of Catholic social, political and economic

backwardness rubbed off on Catholic immigrants to North America, particularly Irish

immigrants from the great famine. Canada was not immune.40

Mark McGowan quotes

Anthony B. Hawke, the Chief Emigrant Agent for Canada West. On October 16, 1847, as

Irish Catholics sailed towards Canada, Hawke complained: “Upon the whole I am

obliged to consider the immigration of this year a calamity to the Province.”41

Although

most of the Irish immigrants to Canada were Protestant Irish, the extreme poverty of the

Catholic Irish settlers tended to be attributed to their Catholic identity.42

According to the

University of Notre Dame’s commemorative history of the Columbian Jubilee, nothing

could be further from the truth. The active and productive involvement of Catholics in a

vibrant and competitive North American economy and culture showed a very different

picture that increasingly challenged Macaulay’s judgments.

She [the Catholic Church] appeared conforming to the genius of American

society, appropriating its progress, forcing itself to meet its wants and repair its

defects.43

Within a century, transplanted upon a new and fertile soil, this immortal

Church had taken root and flourished…How is it that the oldest form of Christian

worship has become acclimated to the youngest of civilized nations? How has the

Roman Church escaped the real or pretended decadence of the Latin race, to

renew its life beyond the seas, in an Anglo-Saxon society? How has this Church,

contemporaneous with the Roman empire, associated with feudal forms and

absolute monarchy in Europe, succeeded in identifying itself with the democracy

of free America? And what is the outlook for Christians, for Catholics? Is it true

that a new era will open to their faith in a new world, which will expand with its

growth, even as there is a decline with the decrepitude of the Old World, so that

her future for mankind will equal her past? Whilst in Europe many weep at the

39 Thomas Aveling, “Great Sights,” 1851, cited by Burris, Exhibiting Religion, 53.

40 See Kenneth Duncan, “Irish Famine Immigration and the Social Structure of Canada West,”

Canadian Review of Sociology and Anthopology, 2 (1965): 19-40.

41 Mark McGowan, Death or Canada, The Irish Famine Migration to Toronto, 1847 (Toronto:

Novalis, 2009).

42 On the Irish diaspora in North America, see Kerby A. Miller, Emigrants and exiles: Ireland

and the Irish exodus to North America (New York: Oxford University Press, 1985).

43 This is an allusion to the Catholic crusade against drunkenness undertaken by Irish prelates

such as Archbishop John Ireland and Bishop John Keane to the dismay of German Catholics.

29

tomb of Christ, shall we behold him arisen in America? Are we destined to

witness upon earth this new manifestation of divine power?44

Even the Vatican joined in acknowledging the speedy progress of the United States. Pope

Leo’s encyclical letter to American Catholics, Longinque Oceani, celebrated the

prosperous condition of American Catholicism. “That your Republic is progressing and

developing by giant strides is patent to all; and this holds true in religious matters also.

For even as your cities, in the course of one century, have made a marvelous increase in

wealth and power, so do we behold the Church, from scant and slender beginnings,

grown with rapidity to be great and exceedingly flourishing.”45

These statements of

unapologetic Catholic pride within and outside the United States were symbolically

reinforced by the Vatican, which loaned precious items from its Museum and Library to

be exhibited at the Columbian Exhibition in Chicago, and by the American bishops’

active involvement in the Exhibition.46

As historian John Pollard writes, “four hundred

years after Columbus discovered America, the Vatican ‘discovered’ American

Catholicism,”47

a form of Catholicism in which Church and progress were not antonyms

of one another.

44 The Columbian Jubilee, II, 509-510.

45 Pope Leo XIII, Encyclical Letter “Longinque Oceani,” (On Catholicity in the United States)

January 6, 1895, in The Great Encyclical Letters of Pope Leo XIII, 322.

46 The items loaned by the Apostolic Library included a phototypy edition of the fourth-century

Greco-Vatican Bible and a sixth-century Codex of the Prophets known as Marchaliano, in

Egyptian language and with various notes by Origen, and several mosaics. A detailed inventory,

as well as correspondence between Archbishop John Ireland and Archbishop Francesco Satolli,

and between Satolli and Cardinal Mariano Rampolla about returning the items to the Vatican, is

found in the Secret Vatican Archives, Archive of the Apostolic Nuntiatura (Delegation) of the

United States of America 1893-1921, Position 1: Chicago Exhibition, 11.

47 John F. Pollard, “Leo XIII and the United States of America, 1898-1903,” in The Papacy and

the New World Order, ed. Vincent Viaene (Leuven: Leuven University Press, 2005), 467.

30

Well-documented Catholic publications appeared to counteract the widespread

assumptions of Catholic backwardness.48

Furthermore, it was not a coincidence that four

years before his papal letter in praise of America, Pope Leo XIII published the encyclical

Rerum Novarum on the struggle of labor, showing the Church’s support for that struggle

and setting the foundation of the modern social doctrine of the Catholic Church.

So the Catholic Church made its presence felt in the Columbian Exhibition both by

involvement of the Bishops and Catholic schools throughout the country and by sanction

of the Vatican. At their annual meeting in St. Louis in November 1891, the Archbishops

had approved the Columbian Catholic Congress with William Onahan, a prominent lay

Catholic leader who had been the chair of the previous lay Catholic congress in

Baltimore, as its main organizer and Patrick Feehan, the Archbishop of Chicago, as chair.

At the same meeting, the Archbishops also approved a Catholic Educational Exhibit for

the Chicago Fair, with Brother Maurelian, from the congregation of the Christian

Schools, as its main organizer, and John Lancaster Spalding, Bishop of Peoria, as

president.

The idea of an Educational Exhibit had first been discussed a year earlier in Chicago by

Bishop Spalding, Archbishop John Ireland, Brother Maurelian and Maurice Francis

Egan.49

The Educational Exhibit was eventually judged a remarkable success50

at a time

when Catholic education in North America was being hotly debated both within and

outside the Church. Besides the Columbian Catholic Congress and the Catholic

Educational Exhibit, the Catholic Church was visible at other levels of the Chicago

Exhibition. Cardinal James Gibbons, just three weeks before the New York meeting to

48 See the survey of Paulist Alfred Young, Catholic and Protestant countries compared in

civilization, popular happiness, general intelligence, and morality (New York: the Catholic book

exchange, 1894).

49 Cited from the Onahan papers by Dennis B. Downey, “Tradition and Acceptance: American

Catholics and the Columbian Exposition,” Mid America, An Historical Review, 63, 2 (1981): 82.

31

decide Catholic involvement in the Parliament, was present at the dedication of the Fair

buildings and grounds in Chicago, where he offered the closing prayer.51

Therefore, Bishop Keane’s “Can the Church afford not to be there?” was not a simple

question. The Catholic Church was already committed to the Columbian Jubilee at a

number of levels. But these were either internal to the Church community or, in the case

of Cardinal Gibbon’s attendance at the Fair’s dedication, complementary of already

planned Catholic oriented events. Catholic participation in a multi-faith event such as the

Parliament of Religions, an event the Church did not originate or control, an event in

which the Church would stand as one among many religions, was something else.

When the Archbishops resumed their meeting after their lunch break, they again took up

the Parliament issue:

After a thorough discussion of Bishops Keane’s letter, it was resolved that His

Eminence should request him, in the name of the Board, to make suitable

arrangements with those in charge of the so-called Parliament of Religions, for

hearing twenty Catholic speakers to be selected by the Rt. Rev. Bishop to

expound Catholic doctrine at their meetings.52

Whether they realized the potential historic significance of the Parliament of Religions or

not, when the American Archbishops agreed that the Catholic Church would be officially

represented at the Parliament of Religions in Chicago they made a groundbreaking

decision. First, such involvement would imply a tacit Catholic endorsement of religious

freedom in a pluralistic context, a reality that the Catholic Church had enjoyed in

50 Corrigan to Ledochowski, New York, December 22, 1893, ASPF, NS, 1893, vol. 74, p. 524.

51 Downey, “Tradition and Acceptance: American Catholics and the Columbian Exposition,” 83.

52 Minutes of the Third Annual Conference of the Most Reverend Archbishops of the

United States, New York, November 16, 1892, ASPF, NS, 1893, vol 27, p. 352.

32

democratic America and that had allowed the Church to grow and flourish. But benefiting

from religious freedom was not the same as endorsing it. The Church’s willingness to

recognize that same right for others, not in a formal declaration but by being present at

the Parliament, as if one among equals, meant a basic enactment of the golden rule

(acknowledge the others as you have been acknowledged; or in a negative formulation,

do not discriminate against others if you do not want to be discriminated against). At the

same time, by approving Catholic involvement in the Parliament, the American

Archbishops set an important precedent in an area that was to become a thorny issue

debated by Catholics for decades to come: religious freedom.

Second, participation in the Parliament was likely to expose the Church to open scrutiny

in the American religious public square, a situation that offered the Church an

opportunity to present itself in such a way as to overcome nativist misinformation and

prejudice. But this exposure was not harmless. The Church also had to be ready itself for

criticism. One could not go without the other.

Third, the decision of the American Archbishops to endorse Catholic involvement in the

Parliament showed a healthy degree of maturity and autonomy as a decision-making

body in matters pertaining to their national jurisdiction. In agreeing to participate in the

Parliament of Religions, the Archbishops acted on their own without formally seeking

approval from the Holy See. In doing so, they risked raising questions of relations to and

even dependence on the Vatican. Barrows mistakenly thought the Archbishops had prior

approval from the Vatican. He is quoted as observing, “When the American Catholic

Archbishops, with the knowledge and consent of the Vatican, decided to take part in the

parliament, they did much to give the meeting its historic importance.”53

It was also

erroneously reported that the American papal delegate approved participation.54

Neither

53 John Henry Barrows, “Results of the Parliament of Religions,” in A Museum of Faiths, ed.

Ziolkowski, 143.

54Weekly Register of London, September 30, 1893, cited by Ellis, The Life of James Cardinal

Gibbons, II, 19.

33

statement was correct. In fact, the autonomy of the Bishops in joining the Parliament was

to become a point of tension, as was concern that some had fallen victim to

Americanization at the expense of the Catholic faith.

Fourth, despite internal divisions over the nature of Catholic presence at the Parliament of

Religions, the Catholic Church was in fact officially represented, with a unified

institutional presence. Indeed, it was the only Christian body so represented. No other

Christian denomination sent official representatives. Individual members with particular

faith-linked affiliations simply chose to participate, sometimes despite the disapproval of

their own Church authorities.

Finally, and perhaps most controversially, the Archbishops’ decision to join other faiths

in the Parliament of Religions created an official and for some an uncomfortable

precedent for the Catholic Church with regard to ecumenical and interfaith relations.

Involvement in the planning of the Parliament entailed courteous and strategic

interactions with Protestants and Jews, always keeping in mind the best interests of the

Catholic Church. Furthermore, the Parliament exposed the Church to representatives of

other religions as partner participants, and some might argue as equals, in a non-

missionary setting.55

With the approval of the Archbishops, the ‘one true religion’ sat at

the table as ‘the one true religion’ among many ‘one true religions.’56

The choice of Bishop Keane as the liaison of the Board of Archbishops to the

Parliament’s Organizing Committee could not be more appropriate as far as the

Parliament was concerned. Keane was truly an ecumenist. Two years earlier, Harvard

University bestowed on Keane the honor of giving the annual Dudleian Lecture, despite

the fact that this lecture series was originally conceived by Judge Paul Dudley in 1750 to

expose the “damnable heresies of the Catholic Church.” The lecture was reported

55 For a treatment of the Parliament in the context of Catholic Mission Studies, see Angelyn

Dries, OSF, “American Catholics and World Religions, Theory and Practice: 1893-1959,”

American Catholic Studies, 113, 1-2 (2002): 31-50. 56

This sense of exclusivity does not apply to Eastern traditions represented at the Parliament.

34

unfavorably by the French Press, which stated that such strange scenes could only be

seen in America:

…The stranger who would have found that evening in that chapel full of

Protestant ministers, among whom were some Catholics, would have been

surprised, perhaps even a bit scandalized, at seeing Monsignor Keane, dressed in

his episcopal garments, mount the pulpit and speak to an audience of heretics.57

This ecumenical gesture by Bishop Keane was consistent with his pastoral approach in

general in the multi-religious American scene. It echoed in principle his comments at the

laying of the cornerstone of the Church of the Holy Name in Baltimore the year before

his appointment to the Parliament planning committee.

We will not come here to abuse Episcopalians, Presbyterians, or Methodists, but

will worship God according to our faith, minding our own business and expecting

our neighbors to do the same. The Church is one of universal charity, and instead

of abusing the neighbors that do not agree with us in matters of faith we can but

say, Brothers, though you do not serve God in our way, serve Him the best you

know how in your own way58

Barrows welcomed the Catholic Church’s decision to participate in the Parliament, all the

more significant because the Church of England declined his invitation to participate and

the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church, his own denomination, categorically

condemned the event. In fact, when Edward Benson, the Archbishop of Canterbury and

the Primate of the Church of England, received an invitation from Barrows to take part in

the Parliament of Religions in Chicago, he declined, objecting that “the Christian religion

is the one religion and cannot be regarded as a member of a Parliament without assuming

the equality of the other intended members and the parity of their position and claims.” In

57Univers, Paris, November 29, 1890, cited by Patrick Henry Ahern, The Life of John J. Keane,

Educator and Archbishop, 1839-1918, (Milwakee: The Bruce Publishing Company, 1955), 122.

Interestingly, with the passing of time, other distinguished Catholic figures have delivered the

Dudleian Lecture, Cardinal Karol Wojtila, a few years before becoming Pope John Paul II, and

Cardinal Carlo Maria Martini, the emeritus Archbishop of Milan, among others. See Pauline

Maier, “The Pope at Harvard: The Dudleian Lectures, Anti-Catholicism, and the Politics of

Protestantism,” Proceedings of the Massachusetts Historical Society, 97, 1 (1985).

58 Baltimore Sun, October 19, 1891, cited by Ahern, The Life of John J. Keane, 114.

35

addition to this denunciation of religious indifferentism, the Anglican Primate was candid

enough to disclose another objection. He rejected both the assumption that the Church of

Rome is the Catholic Church, and the description of the Protestant Episcopal Church in

America as outside the Catholic Church, an attitude he was afraid would be extended to

the Church of England as well. The Archbishop stated: “That view of our position is

untenable.”59

This strong stand certainly generated criticism. With his characteristic irreverence,

Parliament critic Clay Lancaster stated that “the churchman’s reply was rather

presumptuous for one whose domain was an island smaller than New Guinea.”60

Another

Parliament observer quoted by Barrows, British journalist Rev. Francis Herbert Stead,

disagreed. He regretted the absence of the leading religious official of the multi-faith

Empire of Great Britain, “which next to the earth itself is the hugest known standing

Parliament of Religions.” Regarding Benson’s objection to the use of the name

“Catholic,” Stead responded in his editorial that “to call the churches by the names which

they themselves take is only an act of courtesy. It would be rude to prescribe names for

other churches.”61

At that point, it would not cross the mind of the Anglican Primate that

seven years after his death, his own son, Robert Hugh Benson, an Anglican priest, would

convert to Catholicism and put his pen at the service of the Roman Catholic Church. 62

Interestingly, while some sectors of Christianity claimed exclusive right to the name

“Catholic” for themselves, other sectors—particularly Evangelical groups—denied

Catholics the name of “Christian.” These groups condemned Catholic governance

structures and liturgical and devotional traditions as distortions of the original Christian

59 Barrows, The World’s Parliament, I, 22.

60 Lancaster, Incredible World’s Parliament of Religions at the Chicago Columbian Exposition of

1893, 11.

61 Barrows, The World’s Parliament, I, 19, 22-23.

62 See the autobiographical account in Robert Hugh Benson, Confessions of a Convert (London:

New York: Longmans, 1913).

36

message and of the pure and simple life of the early followers of Jesus. However, there

were also moderate Protestants who decried this denunciative attitude. Writing in the

Methodist Review, H. K. Carroll urged, “I think we should never allow ourselves to forget

that the Church of Rome is a Christian Church. It ought not to be necessary to plead for

such a concession; but there are not a few who hold that it is more pagan than Christian,

and that the denunciations of the Apocalypse were meant to apply to it.” Carroll also

affirmed that the Roman Catholic Church “is surely better than no religion, or than any

pagan religion, or than Christless Unitarianism” and offered a condescending apology for

Catholicism from a Protestant point of view.

It has come down to us, through long centuries, from apostolic times. During long

periods of time it alone preserved Christianity on the earth. Our own succession as

Protestants comes down the same stream, through the primitive and the Dark

Ages to the Reformation, when the great divergence began. It is a better Church

now than it was in Luther’s time. It, too, has reformed, and the process will

continue. We do no dishonor to ourselves by speaking of this great and venerable

Church as respectfully as we can. We can show this respect, in one way, by

calling the Church by its proper name. It has a definite title by which it desires to

be known. It does not object to be spoken of as the Catholic Church, or the

Church of Rome, or the Roman Church; but it does resent the terms ‘Romish’

Church, or ‘Popish’ or ‘Papistical’ Church.63

The Parliament offered the Catholic Church the opportunity to assert its Catholic identity

and claim its Christian identity at the same time. Furthermore, rumblings of discontent

regarding the Parliament from such prominent Church leaders and bodies brings into

focus the audacity of the American Archbishops in their decision to participate in the

Parliament. The next few months would be ones of intense preparation, with Bishop

Keane providing constructive input to the proposed Parliament program and its rules of

engagement.64

63 H. K. Carroll, “Our Attitude Toward Roman Catholics,” Methodist Review, 11, March, (1895):

233.

64 Cleary, “Catholic Participation in the World’s Parliament of Religions,” 592.

37

A pilgrimage to Chicago

During the previous four decades, ten cities in Europe, North America and Australia had

played host to World’s Fairs: London (1851, 1862), Dublin and New York (1853),

Munich (1854), Paris (1855, 1867, 1878, 1889), Melbourne (1865), Vienna (1873),

Philadelphia (1876), Sydney (1879) and New Orleans (1884).65

With three previous

World’s Fairs on American soil, peripheric America in a still Eurocentric west

increasingly asserted its importance as it moved center stage in commerce and

industrialization. In the late 19th

century Chicago dared to compete with financial New

York and emerging St. Louis for a place alongside imperial London, glamorous Paris,

independentist Philadelphia, and carnivalesque New Orleans as the host of the next

World’s Fair. The Frontier City, home to the Monadock Building, then the tallest

building in the world, won the privilege of hosting the Columbian Exhibition and became

the fourth American city to host a World’s Fair. The young city pledged itself ready to

invest whatever it took to outshine all its predecessors.

The “Glistening White City” built in the south of Chicago as the site for the Fair

“achieved a plaster actualization of the American quest to create a New Jerusalem, a

utopian ‘City on a Hill’ in the New World Wilderness.”66

Seventy-seven million visitors

in the course of a few months witnessed with amazement the marvel of electricity

together with the world debut of the zipper. As Cardinal Gibbons eloquently noted, the

Windy City of Lake Michigan had experienced a transformation from “porkopolis” to

“thaumatopolis,” city of wonders or the city of miracles.67

(The “porkopolis” nickname

65 Hubert Howe Bancroft, The Book of the Fair, An Historical and Descriptive presentation of the

World’s Science, Art, and Industry, as Viewed through the Columbian Exposition at Chicago in

1893, Volume I (New York: Bounty Books, 1894), 5-28.

66 Judith A. Smith, “The American Dream Actualized: The Glistening ‘White City’ and the

Lurking Shadows of the World’s Columbian Exposition” in The World’s Columbian Exposition,

A Centennial Bibliographic Guide, compiler David J. Bertuca (Westport, Connecticut:

Greenwood Press, 1996), xix. 67

Lee to Satolli, July 12, 1894, ASPF, NS, 1894, vol. 36, p. 79.

38

was a reference to the huge meatpacking plants that sustained much of the city’s large

and largely Catholic working class. The well-known “sweatshop” image of Chicago

stood in sharp contrast with the marvels of the Fair.68

) But the impact of the Exhibition

transcended the city and became the signature site of a new image and international

reputation for America. One observer claimed:

The world viewed the United States differently after millions visited the Fair and

witnessed the American dream firsthand. The United States asserted itself as a

major power –militarily, diplomatically, and economically- in part because of this

presentation. The enterprises of the average citizen, the corporate strength, the

immensity of the country, and the progressive nature of intellectual thought

impressed all who came to Chicago. 69

Even with all the wonders of modern science on display, American and European

Exhibition visitors were taken aback when exotic visitors from the East arrived to attend

the Parliament of Religions. As expectations continued to build about the uniqueness and

significance of the upcoming Parliament, organizers and critics alike sensed that

something historically important was about to make Chicago a focal point of the religious

universe, an axis mundi. Jenkin Lloyd Jones, a prominent Chicago Unitarian minister

who formed a trio with Bonney and Barrows in the organization of the Parliament,

referred to Chicago as the “Cathedral City of the World.”70

Bishop Arthur Cleveland

Coxe of the Protestant Episcopal Church and who was originally against the Parliament,

eventually referred to it as “one of the most serious events of the kind in the history of

humanity, since the wise men from the East came to the cradle of Bethlehem”.71

Barrows

expressed the fervent “conviction that within a hundred years, pilgrims from many lands

68 This working class was significantly made up of immigrants, many of whom happened to be

Catholics from Eastern Europe. Upton Sinclair vividly depicts the challenging conditions these

immigrants faced in his famous novel The Jungle (New York: Penguin Books, 1985).

69 Bertuca, The World’s Columbian Exposition, ix.

70 Richard Hugues Seager, The World’s Parliament of Religions, The East/West Encounter,

Chicago, 1893 (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1995), 127-128.

71 Cited by Barrows, Results of the Parliament of Religions, in A Museum of Faiths, ed.

Ziolkowski, 131.

39

would flock to the scenes of the World’s First Parliament of Religions, in the unhistoric

City of Chicago, almost as they have for centuries flocked to Westminster Abbey, St.

Peter’s Church, and the Holy Shrines of Jerusalem.”72

While the predictions of the

Chairman of the Parliament seem in retrospect somewhat overblown, they did reflect the

sense of occasion represented by the Parliament.

For their part, Catholics from many parts of America and some from overseas flocked to

Chicago, which was bustling not only with the Exhibition and anticipation of the

Parliament of Religions, but with the many side congresses organized by the World’s

Congress Auxiliary and, in particular, the denominational religious congresses

coordinated by the Department of Religion. Many Catholic visitors arrived with a

specifically Catholic agenda that included viewing the Catholic Educational Exhibit,

participating in the Columbian Catholic Congress, one or another of the smaller

congresses from Catholic associations and, of course, for some the ecumenical main

event, the Parliament of Religions.

Some of the special-interest congresses also engaged Catholics. The Labor Congress, for

example, was attended by Archbishop Ireland and the controversial Fr. Edward

McGlynn, a social reformer whose excommunication had been lifted some months

earlier.73

In the spirit of the World’s Fair, the American Archbishops also decided to hold

their Annual Meeting in Chicago, which Archbishop Feehan would host. September 12,

the day of the Archbishops’ meeting, happened to be Maryland Day at the Fair, and

Cardinal Gibbons was invited by Mayor Ferdinand C. Latrobe of Baltimore to give the

opening benediction at the Fair that day. September 12 was also ‘Catholic Day’ at the

Parliament of Religions.74

72 Barrows, The World’s Parliament of Religions, I, 60.

73 Downey, “Tradition and Acceptance: American Catholics and the Columbian Exposition,” 86.

74 Ellis, The Life of James Cardinal Gibbons, II, 17

40

Chicago itself had a rich history of Catholic connection. The city’s first known religious

visitor was the Jesuit Father Jacques Marquette, who drew the first map of the area. Its

first permanent resident was thought to be the fur trader Jean Baptiste Point Du Sable,

also a Catholic. Ecclesiastically, the city fell consecutively within the jurisdiction of the

bishops of Baltimore in Maryland, Bardstown in Kentucky (which would eventually

become the Archdiocese of Louisville), and Vincennes in Indiana (which would become

the Archdiocese of Indiana), before Chicago became an independent diocese under the

pastoral care of William J. Quarter, its first bishop. Four bishops succeeded Bishop

Quarter in the governance of the diocese of Chicago until the diocese was elevated to the

rank of Archdiocese with Patrick Feehan as its first Archbishop.75

Chicago also provides

an example of the extraordinary growth of the Catholic Church in the United States. By

the time of the Parliament of Religions, which coincidentally was going to take place

exactly sixty years after the official foundation of the City of Chicago in 1833, the

Catholic Church claimed 84 churches, in addition to many affiliated schools, colleges,

academies, hospitals, and charitable institutions.76

The Church in Chicago was also

increasingly complex in its ethnic diversity. In addition to the original Irish and Blacks,

there were more recently arrived Italians, Germans, Polish, Lithuanians, and Catholics of

other national origins. This diversity generated conflict since some of these newer

arrivals resented the supremacy of the Irish in Church leadership and their pressured

imposition of English as the lingua franca of American Catholics. The preeminent role of

Irish Catholics in American public life was evident in the Catholic involvement in the

Columbian events.77

75 100 years, n.p.

76 James McGovern, Souvenir of the Silver Jubilee in the Episcopacy of His Grace The Most Rev.

Patrick Augustine Feehan, Archbishop of Chicago, November 1st, 1891 (Chicago: Publications of

the Archdiocese of Chicago, 1892), 8. 77

See Charles Shanabruch, Chicago’s Catholics: The evolution of an American Identity (Notre

Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press, 1981). The rich and complex issue of intra-Catholic

ethnic tensions transcends the scope of this study. A helpful portrait of Chicago’s local ethnic mix

is found in Melvin Holli and Peter Jones, Ethnic Chicago: A Multicultural Portrait (Grand

Rapids, Michigan: Eerdmans, 1995).

41

Catholic Educational Exhibit and Columbian Catholic Congress

American Catholics had reasons to feel proud of their Educational Exhibit which opened

with the Columbian Exhibition on May 1, 1893. The Exhibit occupied thirty thousand

square feet in the Manufacturers and Liberal Arts Building, and was the largest of several

hundred separate educational displays.78

A historian of the Fair described the Catholic

Exhibit in all its breadth:

In addition to the exhibits of parish schools, academies, colleges, and universities,

are those of normal schools, of schools of science and technology, of commercial,

industrial, and manual training schools, of schools for negroes and Indians, of

kindergartens and orphanages, and of benevolent and reformatory institutes.

Almost in the centre of the group is a statue of Archbishop Feehan, carved in

Carrara marble, of chaste and elegant design. This was presented by the priests of

the diocese of Chicago, and on the pedestal is inscribed beneath his name the

simple legend: “The Protector of our Schools.” Around it are arranged in booths

the exhibits of the various dioceses of which nearly all the principal schools are

represented. The collections include every description and grade of educational

work; but with no distinctive classification of the various grades, as in those of the

public schools. Of parish schools several hundred are represented, with the

diocese of Chicago, Philadelphia, and Buffalo having the largest number. Add to

these the exhibits of higher institutions of learning, and of industrial, charitable,

and reformatory institutes, and some idea may be formed as to the magnitude of

the display, representing the aggregate results accomplished by all the numerous

orders of priesthood and sisterhood, to whose care are intrusted [sic] the

educational interests of Catholic America.79

September 2, 1893, declared Catholic Education Day at the Columbian Exhibition, was

marked by speeches from Archbishop Patrick John Ryan of Philadelphia, Archbishop

John Hennessy of Dubuque, Iowa, and Archbishop Frederick Katzer of Milwaukee.

Archbishop Patrick Feehan of Chicago served as host. Protestant Elizabeth Beecher

78 Downey, “Tradition and Acceptance: American Catholics and the Columbian Exposition,” 83.

79 Bancroft, The Book of the Fair, 238-239.

42

Hooker, leader in the women’s suffrage movement, and the Honorable Thomas Gargan, a

prominent Boston lawyer and orator, who gave the oration, also took part.80

Fr. P. J. Muldoon, from Holy Name Cathedral and the Chancellor of the Archdiocese of

Chicago at the time, referred to the Catholic performance in the Exhibition at large, and

particularly in the Catholic Educational Exhibit, in glowing terms:

The Columbian Exposition gloriously surpassed all former efforts in the same

line, and unmistakably the Catholic Church never worked so energetically or

displayed herself so conspicuously to engage the respect, admiration, and love of

the world as in this Exposition. All classes and creeds, some in praise, others in

criticism, announced that the Catholic Church had caught every inspiration, and

had taken advantage of every opportunity. We feel that this was no where more

conspicuously patent than in the Catholic Educational Exhibit.81

The Catholic educational display was not without political intent. It coincided with

internal Catholic debates over the integration of the Catholic schools into the public

system. Three years earlier, Archbishop Ireland, committed to advancing the

Americanization of the Catholic Church, proposed to the National Education Association

that the Catholic parochial schools be integrated into the public school system, a proposal

that found earnest opposition among many Catholics and eventually failed. 82

The Exhibit

was certainly a statement to both Catholics and the larger community that Catholic

schools were not in need of incorporation into the larger public system.

In addition to the Catholic Educational Exhibition, Catholics held their own

denominational Congress, from Monday, September 4th

through Saturday, September 9th

,

1893. After the formal ceremonial opening, 46 papers were delivered: three on historical

and current aspects related to the Columbian Jubilee, three on the Church and politics,

thirteen on the Church and society, ten on immigration issues, seven on education, five

80 Downey, “Tradition and Acceptance: American Catholics and the Columbian Exposition,” 85.

81 The World’s Columbian Catholic Congresses and Educational Exhibit, Volume II (Chicago: J.

S. Hyland and Company, 1893), 2. 82

Downey, “Tradition and Acceptance: American Catholics and the Columbian Exposition,” 81.

43

on women and delivered by women, and five delivered by Bishops plus one paper

delivered by a priest. Since it was a lay congress, thirty-four of the speakers were lay

people, eight of whom were women. Eighteen members of the clergy (ten bishops and

eight priests) gave speeches. The speakers came from the District of Columbia and

eighteen other cities as well as from England, Scotland, New Zealand, and the Vatican.

The Columbian Catholic Congress coordinator was a layman, William Onahan, chair of

the first Catholic lay congress held in Baltimore four years earlier. Lay prominence also

suited the mostly non-theological issues discussed. Topics included issues of labor and

job skills in which lay Catholics were much involved. These issues were in tune with the

then emerging social doctrine of the Church outlined just a few years earlier in Pope

Leo’s encyclical Rerum Novarum on capital and labor. However, the independent display

of lay initiative and leadership on those issues at the Congress must have raised some

concerns among the clergy in the American Church naturally dominated and controlled

by the hierarchy. This hypothesis might find a confirmation in the decision of the

Archbishops gathered in Philadelphia the following year to plan the first Eucharistic

Congress of the United States but with an organizing committee exclusively composed of

the clergy. Other lay initiatives, such as membership in secret societies, were also being

discussed by the bishops at the time. Membership in two of such lay organizations (the

Odd Fellows and the Knights of Pythias) was about to be prohibited by the Archbishops

at their annual meeting immediately following the Congress. Both organizations were

condemned a year later, together with the Sons of Temperance, by the Holy Office (also

known as the Inquisition) in the Vatican. Another area in which Catholic laity was

becoming increasingly influential was the Catholic press. Lay control of the Catholic

press prompted a resolution from the Archbishops demanding “measures for abating

injury done to religion by scandalous publications in Catholic newspapers.”83

83 Minutes of the V Annual Conference of the Most Reverend Archbishops of the United States,

Philadelphia, October 10, 1894, and Minutes of the IV Annual Conference of the Most Reverend

Archbishops of the United States. Chicago, September 12, 1893, ASV, Sezione II, Stati Uniti,

Posizione 34, Incontri annuali degli arcivescovi 1893-1896, 1894-1900, 24-26, 13-21.

44

Perhaps these brewing tensions about the lay role in the American Catholic Church were,

in part, why Cardinal Gibbons was not totally in favor of holding the lay Congress, a

concern that seemed to outweigh the Cardinal’s genuine interest in the social issues what

were to be part of the Congress’ program. One and a half years earlier, Gibbons shared

his reservations about the Congress with Archbishop Ireland, indicating his desire to

“kill” the event or, failing that, make it the last one. However, Ireland disagreed and

succeeded in persuading the Cardinal to seek and obtain papal approval for the

Congress.84

Perhaps Gibbons was also worried about attracting an inordinate amount of

attention around the Congress from the Vatican and elsewhere at a time in which the

relations between Catholic identity and American culture were under scrutiny inside and

outside the Church, both in the United States and overseas.

Lay Catholic Congresses were already a common practice in Europe with strong

networks in Germany, Belgium, France and Italy, but they were also becoming vehicles

for furthering either Catholic liberal agendas or ultramontanist tendencies prevalent

among sectors of the laity.85

When news about the Chicago Congress reached Europe

early in the planning process, French businessman Léon Harmel suggested to Cardinal

Gibbons to make the event an international gathering, a proposal the Cardinal declined in

order to avoid difficulties and embarrassments.86

The Columbian Catholic Congress was also revealing of how the Catholic Church was

regarded by nativist and anti-Catholic Protestant publications. On the occasion of the

Congress, Margaret Lisle Shepherd, founder of the anti-Catholic National Association of

Women Loyal to American Liberty, issued a call for Protestants to beware of un-

American Catholic intentions. She warned that the 5th

Annual German Catholic Congress,

84 Ellis, The Life of James Cardinal Gibbons, II, 13.

85 A helpful introduction to the topic is found in Emiel Lamberts, “Catholic Congresses as

Amplifiers of International Catholic Opinion,” in The Papacy and the New World Order, ed.

Viaene, 213-224.

86 Ellis, The Life of James Cardinal Gibbons, II, 14.

45

held in Buffalo, NY, on September 23, 1891, endorsed a German Catholic call to hold an

International Catholic Congress for the purpose of restoring the temporal power of the

Pope as an Independent Sovereign. Shepherd reported that given the political

circumstances of Europe, the intended Catholic Congress was now planned for Chicago.

Shepherd denounced the project as part of a secret design of the Church of Rome to take

control of the United States.

The evils of unrestricted immigration have given to the Church vast numerical

power, and our land is filled with a class dangerous to our welfare as a nation…

The World’s Fair will simply be utilized by the Hierarchy in America, in fact, by

it universally, to advertise its glories, and to strike the great blow against

American civil and religious liberties. This great system, which knows no mercy,

can show no pity, has no sense of gratitude, will, through the power she has

gained, plant the Papal flag over the building where will convene their Congress;

and the glorious banner of liberty will stand beside it, only a few feet LOWER.87

While it is tempting today to dismiss Shepherd, her anti-Catholic rant fit within a larger

anti-immigrant and anti-Catholic nativism then growing in the United States, and of

concern to the Church. Shepherd was also the author of a dramatic autobiography that

deserves historiographic attention and scrutinty. In it, she disclosed her identity as the

daughter of an Irish Catholic priest who broke his vow of celibacy when he seduced her

mother. Shepherd also claimed to have been herself the mistress of another Catholic

priest. Later Shepherd spent some time in a convent for penitent recluses in England. As

a result of such misfortunes, she eventually not only left the convent but also the Catholic

Church and emigrated to America.88

Despite Shepherd’s misconceptions about the true

agenda of the Columbian Catholic Congress and other inaccuracies of her work (she

mistakenly affirms the elevation of Archbishop Ireland to the cardinalate, an idea that

87 Margaret Lisle Shepherd, Pope Leo’s demand: He challenges Americans, and boldly claims

Temporal Power. The Great International Roman Catholic Congress to assemble in Chicago,

during the World’s Fair to execute his plans (Philadelphia: Jordan Brothers, 1892). 19-20.

88 Margaret Lisle Shepherd, My Life in the Convent: or the marvelous personal experiences of

Margaret L. Shepherd (Sister Magdalene Adelaide), consecrated penitent of the Arno’s Court

Convent, Bristol, England (Canada & New South Wales, Australia: Margaret L. Shepherd,

publisher, 1892).

46

never crystallized), her statements certainly show that the momentum gained by the

Catholic Church through its association with the Columbian events in Chicago did not go

unnoticed in anti-Catholic circles.

While Shepherd’s warnings about a papal conspiracy to subdue America are absurd, the

Vatican did seek to get closer to the United States and monitor more closely the

American Church through the appointment of a resident Vatican delegate. The person

chosen to fill this strategic new post was Archbishop Francesco Satolli. Satolli was born,

raised and trained for the priesthood in Perugia, the diocese whose bishop, Gioacchino

Pecci, would become Pope Leo XIII. Satolli became an expert on the thought of St.

Thomas Aquinas and served the Vatican in various posts, the most important of which –

prior to his appointment to the United States- was as rector of the Academy of Nobles,

the Vatican’s equivalent of a school for foreign affairs. Satolli had previously visited

America as a papal representative for the Centennial celebration of the hierarchy in the

United States. This second visit –which was originally to represent the Vatican at the

Exposition- was extended by his appointment as the first permanent delegate of the

Vatican to the United States, although without official diplomatic status. 89

He attended

the Columbian Congress and gave an address translated from Italian by Archbishop

Ireland. Referring to his hopes for the American Church, Satolli was enthusiastic.

Go forward, in one hand bearing the book of christian truth (sic) and in the other

the constitution of the United States. Christian truth and American liberty will

make you free, happy and prosperous. They will put you on the road to progress.

May your steps ever persevere on that road.90

89 The Vatican Delegate did not have diplomatic status in the United States. His functions were

totally restricted to internal Church affairs. Vatican-American diplomatic relations would not be

established until 1982, under Pope John Paul II and President Ronald Reagan. For a well-

documented treatment of the subject, see Massimo Franco, Parallel Empires, The Vatican and the

United States-Two Centuries of Alliance and Conflict (New York: Doubleday, 2008).

90 . J. R. Slattery, editor, Francis Archbishop Satolli. Loyalty to Church and State (Baltimore:

John Murphy and Company, 1895), 150.

47

Satolli’s statement embraced the spirit of the multi-faceted Catholic presence in Chicago

in the fall of 1893. In spite of nativist warnings, the appraisal of authorities of the

World’s Congress Auxiliary officials was highly positive, as conveyed in a letter written

by Bonney a year later. “It is universally admitted that the Catholic Congress held at

Chicago last year, was one of the most important and commanding of the great series of

World’s Congresses which will make the year 1893 illustrious in human history.”91

Bonney’s positive assessment was echoed by the house historian of the Exposition, who

affirmed that “the most imposing of all the denominational Congresses was that held by

the Catholic Church.”92

In addition to the Columbian Catholic Congress, several Catholic societies also held their

own specific congresses. These included the Saint Peter Claver Catholic Union for

Colored Catholics, the Catholic Young Men’s Union, the Society of Saint Vincent de

Paul, the German Catholic Young Men’s Guilds, the Catholic Benevolent Legion, and the

Young Men’s Societies.93

With the conclusion of the Catholic Congress, the next big item of the Chicago agenda

for Catholics was the Parliament of Religions. Four years after Bonney first entertained

the idea of a congress of faiths, two years after Barrows issued his preliminary address to

the world proposing the idea, one year after the Fair’s buildings were solemnly dedicated,

and four months after the Exhibition opened its doors to the world, the most unique event

of the whole Columbian enterprise was about to take place. And the Catholic Church was

ready to make its presence felt throughout the most encompassing religious gathering the

world had ever seen.

91 The World’s Columbian Catholic Congresses and Educational Exhibit, II, 5.

92 Rossiter Johnson, editor, A History of the World’s Columbian Exposition held in Chicago in

1893, IV (New York: D. Appleton, 1897-1898), 331. 93

Houghton, Neely’s History of the Parliament of Religions, 865.

48

“It would seem more advisable to hold assemblies apart”

The presence of the Catholic Church at the dawn of the global interfaith movement was a

mixed venture, reflecting both openness and withdrawal, risk-taking and caution. On the

one hand, the Church’s decision to take part in the first Chicago Parliament of Religions

of 1893 was a bold attempt by some in the Church to demonstrate the ability of the

Church to adapt to the demands of American democracy. Furthermore, the Church’s

participation in a subsequent Pan-American Congress on Religion and Education two

years later in Toronto and the enthusiasm generated among French Catholic intellectuals

for the idea of a Parliament of Religions suggested for Paris in 1900 were symptomatic of

a positive Catholic response to the emerging ecumenical movement.

On the other hand, Catholic exposure to the religious public square was viewed with

discomfort by other sectors of the Church. They warned of the danger of religious

indifferentism posed by any Church interfaith involvement and saw as a threat the

demands that could derive from it. Therefore, the same Church that first supported late

19th

century initiatives like the Parliament of Religions in Chicago rejected plans for a

Parliament of Religions in Paris and denied any support to the idea that a Parliament of

Religions be held in the context the St. Louis Exhibition in 1904, meant to be an

American successor to the Chicago event.

This chapter covers a span of a decade, from the opening of the Parliament of Religions

in Chicago to the Church turning its back on a follow-up congress in St. Louis. The

chapter introduces the actors in favor of and against these inter-religious congresses, and

the reasons they had for holding their positions. The primary milestone following

Catholic involvement in the Chicago Parliament was the official discouragement of

participation in any similar interfaith events by Pope Leo XIII in September 1895. The

chapter is divided into three main sections: the Parliament of Religions, its aftermath in

North America, and the impact of the idea in Europe and the Vatican response.

49

The World’s Parliament of Religions

At 10:00 am on Monday, September 11, 1893, while a reproduction of the Liberty Bell

tolled ten times to honor the number of global religions represented at the Parliament of

Religions, an inaugural procession set out on its route in downtown Chicago.

Representatives of those ten religious traditions began a solemn march towards the Hall

of Columbus of the Memorial Art Palace. The venue was crowded with 4,000 people

waiting in great expectation for the arrival of the unique cast. Given that Cardinal

Gibbons happened to be the highest ranking member of all the religions represented, it

was his honor to preside over the opening ceremony from a throne-like chair on a raised

platform flanked by religious dignitaries.1 The Cardinal was accompanied by five other

Catholic leaders --Archbishop Patrick Feehan of Chicago, Archbishop Patrick Ryan of

Philadelphia, Archbishop Francis Redwood of Wellington, New Zealand, Bishop Joseph

Cotter of Winona, Minnesota, and Bishop John Keane, the Rector of the Catholic

University of America. They were joined by one of the most prominent American

Catholic laymen, the Honorable William Onahan. In total the Catholic Church had the

largest representation on the platform. As a Chicagoan, Archbishop Feehan offered words

of welcome to “an assembly unique in the history of the world.” He also pointed out the

fidelity of each participant to their own faith without making any concessions, and

emphasizing the “common humanity” of all the participants. Cardinal Gibbons offered a

response stating that, despite their disagreement in matters of faith, “there is one platform

on which we all stand united. It is the platform of charity, of humanity, and of

benevolence.”2 In Keane’s original program, the response was supposed to be shared by

1 In addition to Barrows and Cleary, see Dennis P. McCann, “Catholics at the Parliament: An

Americanist Breakthrough” (paper presented at the American Academy of Religion Annual

Meeting, Section: The 1893 Parliament of Religions: New Voices from the Margins, 22-23

November, 1991), in Archives of the Council for a Parliament of the World’s Religions

(ACPWR), Box 21A, File McCann.

2 John Henry Barrows, The World’s Parliament of Religions, an illustrated and popular story of

the World’s First Parliament of Religions held in Chicago in connections with the Columbian

Exposition of 1893, Volume I (Chicago: Parliament Publishing Company, 1893), 79-81.

50

Msgr. C. J. Gadd from Manchester, the Vicar General of the Diocese of Salford, England,

and Cardinal Patrick Moran from Sydney, Australia, but unexplainedly neither attended

the Parliament.3

A unique element of this opening ceremony reported by Cleary was that Cardinal

Gibbons led the assembly in the Anglican version of the Lord’s Prayer. Cleary does not

indicate his sources for this statement.4 Barrows simply specifies that the Cardinal

opened the ceremony with a prayer.5 John Tracy Ellis, Gibbons’ biographer, chooses to

omit any reference to the opening prayer.6 Whether Cleary’s reference is accurate or not,

it is an indisputable fact that the Lord’s Prayer was recited every single day of the event

by everyone regardless of their religion7 and –even more remarkably- Rabbi Emil Hirsch

of Chicago led the Lord’s Prayer as the second final act in the closing ceremony.8

3 While Cleary refers to Moran’s absence, neither Cleary nor McCann mention Gadd at all.

Regarding Moran, it is an interesting coincidence that in the Fifth Parliament of the World’s

Religions, held in Melbourne, Australia, in December 2009, Cardinal George Pell from Sydney,

Moran’s fifth successor, was scheduled in the program, but also failed to appear.

4 James Cleary, “Catholic Participation in the World’s Parliament of Religions,” The Catholic

Historical Review, 55, 4 (1970): 595.

5 Barrows, The World’s Parliament, I, 62.

6 John Tracy Ellis, The Life of James Cardinal Gibbons, Archbishop of Baltimore, Volume II

(Milwaukee: The Bruce Publishing Company, 1952), 18. Downey –without indicating his source

either states that it was a rumor to falsely discredit Gibbons and his allies during the Americanist

controversy a few years later. Dennis B. Downey, ‘Tradition and Acceptance: American

Catholics and the Columbian Exposition,’ Mid America, An Historical Review, 63, 2 (1981): 82,

90.

7 John Henry Barrows, The World’s Parliament of Religions, an illustrated and popular story of

the World’s First Parliament of Religions held in Chicago in connections with the Columbian

Exposition of 1893, Volume II (Chicago: Parliament Publishing Company, 1893), 1560

8 Barrows, The World’s Parliament, I, 159.

51

Catholic delegates and Catholic Day

Throughout the following seventeen days of the Parliament, approximately 150,000

visitors were offered a program of 194 papers, speeches, poems and sermons.9 The

content was organized around a daily theme and Keane made sure that the Catholic

Church was ably represented throughout the event. Two weeks prior to the opening,

Keane made public the official list of Catholic speakers in the general program of the

Parliament. It struck a remarkable balance of Catholic voices including bishops, secular

priests, religious, and laity—however, with the total absence of women, although women

had been active participants in the Catholic Congress the preceding week.10

As Parliament scholar Dennis McCann notes, the most important thing about Catholic

presenters at the Parliament was not what they said, but their strong and committed

presence in the event.11

But who were the official Catholic attendees and what role did

they play?12

Cardinal Gibbons was certainly the most prominent of the Catholic

presenters. He wrote an address entitled “The Needs of Humanity Supplied by the

Catholic Religion” that clearly responded to the guidelines set by the ninth and the tenth

objectives of the Parliament: “to discover what light Religion has to throw on problems

of the current age, such as temperance, labor, education, wealth, poverty… and to foster

international peace.”13

Gibbon’s paper could well serve as a window to explore the

9 Richard Seager, editor, Dawn of Religious Pluralism: Voices from the World’s Parliament of

Religion, 1893 (La Salle, Ill.: Open Court, 1999),1.

10 “World’s Religious Parliament, Programme for the Representation of the Catholic Church,”

The New York Times, August 27, 1893, accessed June 25, 2012,

http://query.nytimes.com/mem/archive-

free/pdf?res=9D00E2DB163EEF33A25754C2A96E9C94629ED7CF.

11 McCann, “Catholics at the Parliament: An Americanist Breakthrough,” 1.

12 Instead of focusing on the content of their addresses, a task already attempted by McCann, the

following paragraphs will highlight the profile of some Catholic participants. A detailed relation

of the Catholic participation in the general program day by day, based on direct examination of

the Parliament’s proceedings and of previous lists of Catholic delegates compiled by Cleary and

McCann, will be found as an appendix.

13 Barrows, The World’s Parliament, I, 14.

52

evolution of the practice of religious charity into the modern field of social

development.14

Since the Cardinal was not feeling well, the address was read by Bishop

Keane.15

Among the priest presenters, Fr. Walter Elliott (1842-1928)16

stands out with a symbolic

meaning as a member of the Missionary Society of St. Paul, also known as the Paulist

Fathers. Founded in New York in 1858 by Fr. Isaac Hecker, a Protestant convert to

Catholicism, the Paulists were the first religious congregation of men established in the

United States. The original purpose of this community was to convert Protestants to

Catholicism. That was the job of Fr. Elliott, an ardent missionary among American non-

Catholics.

A significant feature of Keane’s chosen group of Catholic presenters and an element that

has been totally overlooked is that four were converts to Catholicism and one was the

grandchild of a convert.

Father Augustine F. Hewitt (1820-1897)17

was the second superior general of the Paulist

Fathers in New York, succeeding Fr. Isaac Hecker. Born to Congregationalist parents,

Hewitt became an Episcopalian and eventually converted to Catholicism. Once a

Catholic, he became a priest of the Redemptorist congregation and a founding member of

the Paulists when they split from the Redemptorists. His paper entitled “Rational

Demonstrations of the Being of God” was read by Fr. Elliott.

14 On charity and justice-related Catholic initiatives in the United States, see Bryan Hehir, editor,

Catholic Charities USA: 100 Years at the Intersection of Charity and Justice (Collegeville,

Minn.: Liturgical Press, 2006).

15 Ellis, The Life of James Cardinal Gibbons, II, 18.

16 “Rev. Fr. Walter Elliott,” Find a Grave, accessed July 6, 2012, http://www.findagrave.com/cgi-

bin/fg.cgi?page=gr&GRid=44547720.

17 “Augustine Francis Hewitt,” Catholic Encyclopedia, accessed June 25, 2012,

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07309b.htm.

53

Another convert was Msgr. Robert Seton (1839-1927),18

the Rector of St. Joseph’s

Church in Jersey City, New Jersey, and a professor at Seton Hall College. He was the

grandson of Elizabeth Seton, who would become the first American to be canonized a

saint. She herself had been a convert to Catholicism from the Episcopal Church. Robert

Seton eventually relocated to Rome, where he was made the Archbishop of Heliopolis, a

virtual diocese, in recognition of his lifetime service to the Church. His paper was entitled

“The Catholic Church and the Bible.”

Another prominent convert to Catholicism among the delegate priests, but who failed to

attend the Parliament, was Passionist Father Fidelis Kent Stone (1840-1921). He would

have been the only Catholic representative from South America at the Parliament. The

son of the Dean of the Episcopal School of Theology in Cambridge, Massachusetts,

educated at Harvard and Göttigen in Germany, and a married Episcopal priest with two

daughters, Stone converted to Catholicism soon after his wife died. He joined the Paulist

Fathers after entrusting the care of his daughters to the Sisters of Mercy. He eventually

left the Paulists and entered the Congregation of the Passionists, where he played a key

role in establishing that religious community in Argentina.19

Stone was a remarkable

orator, who likely impressed Keane when he spoke at the foundation ceremony of the

Catholic University of America.

Among the lay Catholic representatives, two more converts stand out, one an expert in

religion and science and the other in the science of religion. Thomas Dwight (1843-

1911), Parkman Professor of Anatomy at Harvard Medical School, wrote a paper entitled

“Man in the Light of Science and Religion.” He converted from Congregationalism to

Catholicism at the age of 13.20

His paper was read by Bishop Keane. Also a convert from

18 “Robert Seton,” New Catholic Encyclopedia, accessed July 6, 2012,

http://go.galegroup.com.myaccess.library.utoronto.ca/ps/i.do?id=GALE%7CCX3407710283&v=

2.1&u=utoronto_main&it=r&p=GVRL&sw=w. GALE|CX3407710283.

19 “Father Fidelis Kent Stone, C.P., Holy Cross Province,” Passionist Biographies, Passionist

Historical Archives, accessed June 25, 2012, http://cpprovince.org/archives/bios/10/10-14c.php.

20 See James J. Walsh, “Thomas Dwight,” American Catholic Quarterly Review 37 (1912): 60.

54

Congregationalism was Merwin-Marie Snell (1863-?).21

Snell was a secretary to Bishop

Keane and a scholar of comparative religion. He was the director of the Scientific Section

of the Parliament, a program area set aside to accommodate papers of a strictly academic

nature and delivered alongside the general program in Hall III of the Memorial Art

Palace. Snell’s oversight of this section constitutes a Catholic service to the Parliament

that has been totally overlooked. Snell opened the section with a paper entitled “The

Practical Service of the Science of Religions to the Cause of Religious Unity and the

Mission Enterprise.” His belief that “every missionary school should be a college of

comparative religion” was groundbreaking.22

He also presented another paper entitled

“Importance of Philosophy to the Parliament of Religions.” Snell’s participation in the

Scientific Section brought him into close contact with Swami Vivekananda, a monk from

the Ramakrishna Order in India, who was later acclaimed the most outstanding

participant in the Parliament in spite of the Christian supremacist agenda of the

Parliament organizers. Vivekananda and Snell developed a deep bond that eventually

prompted the Swami to request letters of support from Snell when he later faced

questions in India related to his performance in Chicago.23

That bond may well have

contributed to Snell eventually becoming an ardent devotee of Hinduism, an outcome

certainly not anticipated by Bishop Keane. 24

Snell was later omitted by Cleary from his

list of Catholic participants in the Parliament.

Despite the non-proselytizing etiquette of the Parliament and Keane’s genuine

ecumenical spirit, the Catholic Church was not hesitant to present itself as the true

Christian Church to other Christian churches and as the true religion to other religions.

The Church was not shy either to showcase converts to Catholicism and suggest the

21 Eric Ziolkowski, editor, A Museum of Faiths: Histories and Legacies of the 1893 World’s

Parliament of Religions (Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1993), 348.

22 Seager, The Dawn of Religious Pluralism, 154, 51.

23 Rajagopal Chattopadhya, Swami Vivekananda in India: A Corrective Biography, (Delhi:

Motilar Banarsidass Publishers, 1999), 159.

24 Ziolkowski, A Museum of Faiths, 40.

55

welcome that awaited others. However, despite this denominational self-affirmation,

Catholic participants were also moved by the ecumenical spirit of the Parliament. The

Chronicle of the Parliament reveals a remarkable incident on the occasion of another

Catholic paper:

It was at the evening session in Columbus Hall that the incident (we will not say

accident) occurred, which disturbed the preconcerted order of proceedings, and

furnished so striking a demonstration of the genuine spirit of brotherly kindness

that pervaded the assembly. Before the conclusion of the reading, by the Rev. Dr.

Mullany, of the posthumous paper by Brother Azarias, Bishop Keane in the chair,

it was discovered that the other speakers announced for the evening had not

arrived, and the Presbyterian Congress, which was then in session in Hall No. 3,

was invited to complete its evening exercises in the Hall of the Parliament. At this

curiously mingled meeting Bishop Keane and Dr. Barrows alternately presided.

Eminent dignitaries of the Catholic Church were sympathetic attendants on a

Presbyterian Denominational Congress; and lookers-on were at a loss which most

to admire, the exquisite felicity and taste with which the speakers met the

unexpected occasion, or the cordial appreciation and applause of their unwonted

[sic] auditors.25

One of the Presbyterian presenters was Canadian Dr. George Grant, then principal of

Queen’s University in Kingston. It is also reported that another day Bishop Keane and

Archbishop Ireland ended up presiding over a Jewish Conference in the Hall of

Washington after failing to get into the overcrowded Hall of Columbus.26

Participation in

the Parliament was similarly significant for the Jewish community. Some commentators

consider the involvement of Jews and Catholics in the Parliament as a rite of passage into

the American mainstream for both faith communities. Parliament scholar Richard Seager

writes: “Jews and Catholics were becoming worthy if weighty guests at the banquet table

of American religious history.”27

25 “Das Weltparlament der Religionen in Chicago 1893,” Tuepflis Global Village Library,

accessed June 25, 2012, http://www.payer.de/neobuddhismus/neobud0202.htm.

26 Rossiter Johnson, A History of the World’s Columbian Exposition, IV (New York: D.

Appleton, 1897-1898), 332, cited by Cleary, “Catholic Participation in the World’s Parliament of

Religions,” 597.

27 Richard Hugues Seager, “Pluralism and the American Mainstream,” in A Museum of Faiths, ed.

Ziolkowski, 207.

56

Finally, another Catholic presenter must be singled out, Fr. John Slattery, CSJ. Fr.

Slattery was the founder and rector of St. Joseph Seminary in Baltimore, Maryland, the

house of formation of the religious congregation of the same name devoted to the pastoral

care of Black Americans in the United States, a cause of which he is considered by some

a “foremost champion” and a prophet within the Catholic Church. He was an outspoken

opponent of “what he called the ‘uncatholic’ opposition to the ordination of Black men to

the priesthood.”28

Fr. Slattery’s paper was entitled “The Catholic Church and the Negro

Race.” He had also delivered a lecture in the Catholic Congress a week earlier.

Every single day the Parliament heard a Catholic paper except Monday, September 25,

the day on which absentee Fr. Stone was scheduled to speak but cancelled. However,

despite this unintended Catholic silence, the Catholic Church was spoken about on this

day. Professor Philip Schaff, a Swiss-born and German-educated Protestant theologian in

the United States, delivered his now famous address, “The Reunion of Christendom,” in

which he said: “The Roman Catholic Church claims to be the one and only Church of

Christ, governed by his Vicar in the Vatican; and undoubtedly she presents the most

imposing organization the world has ever seen.”29

In addition to this institutional

compliment, Schaff pointed out, from a Protestant perspective, the challenges posed for

the actual reunion of Christians, by Catholic positions, especially those affirmed by the

first Vatican Council:

The difficulty of union with the Roman Church is apparently increased by the

modern dogmas of papal absolutism and papal infallibility declared by the

Vatican Council in 1870. These decrees are the logical completion of the papal

monarchy, the apex of the pyramid of the hierarchy. But they can refer only to the

Roman Church. The official decisions of the pope, as the legitimate head of the

Roman Church, are final and binding upon all Roman Catholics, but they have no

force whatever to any other Christians.

28 Stephen J. Ochs, “The Ordeal of the Black Priest,” US Catholic Historian, 5, 1 (1986): 45,

accessed June 25, 2012, http://www.jstor.org.myaccess.library.utoronto.ca/stable/25153743.

29 These remarks are to be found only in the original version of this paper chosen by Richard

Seager for his Parliament Anthology. See Seager, The Dawn of Religious Pluralism, 104.

Barrows and Houghton present differing edited versions of this paper.

57

What if the pope, in the spirit of the first Gregory and under the inspiration of a

higher authority should infallibly declare his own fallibility in all matters lying

outside of his own communion, and invite Greeks and Protestants to a fraternal

pan-Christian Council in Jerusalem, where the mother-church of Christendom

held the first council of reconciliation and peace?30

Schaff’s remarks shed light from a scholarly perspective on the perception of Catholics

by Protestants that in more passionately nativist circles fueled strong anti-Catholic

sentiments.

The last day of the general program, Wednesday, September 27, focused on the

Parliament itself and included the last Catholic paper, “The Ultimate Religion,” presented

by Bishop Keane. He reserved for himself the closure of the Catholic contributions to the

general program. Faithful to the task entrusted to him by the Archbishops a year earlier,

Keane managed to accomplish a most unique enterprise in the history of Catholicism: to

furnish a diverse delegation of eighteen Catholic speakers, including a Cardinal, seven

diocesan priests, four priests members of religious institutes, one religious brother, five

prominent laymen from different walks of life and himself, a bishop. Each presented a

Catholic perspective on the different themes of the Parliament program while,

importantly, standing side-by-side in the unfamiliar company of their counterparts from

the other religions represented: Shintoists, Taoists, Confucians, Hindus, Jains, Buddhists,

Zoroastrians, Jews, Muslims, and Orthodox and Protestant Christians. Catholics even

alternated papers with several prominent women ministers of religion involved in the

Parliament, including the Rev. Annis Eastman, the pastor of a Congregational Church in

Peoria, Illinois, and the Rev. Anna Garland Spencer, from Providence, Rhode Island.

The Catholic delegation was made up almost exclusively of Americans.31

Most of the

Catholic delegates were Irish natives or descendants. Among them there were

conservatives, such as Msgr. Seton who attacked biblical criticism, Professor Dwight

who questioned evolutionism, and Fr. Hewitt, who later became a critic of the

30 Barrows, The World’s Parliament, II, 1196.

31 See detailed chronicle in Appendix B.

58

Parliament. There were also liberals, such as Bishop Keane and Merwin-Marie Snell.

Catholics constituted the second largest confessional delegation at the Parliament of

Religions, second only to Protestants considered as a whole.32

In addition to organizing Catholic participation in the general Parliament program, Keane

also organized a special Catholic Day at the Parliament designed to expose Catholic

doctrine and theology to any interested participants in the Parliament. This program took

place in the Hall of Washington on September 12, closely following the Parliament’s

inauguration. The day was divided into three sections –morning, afternoon, and evening-

with Keane presiding. This Catholic Day was intended to dispel fears among concerned

Catholics that by participating in the Parliament of Religions the Catholic Church was

carelessly and promiscuously mingling with other religions.33

Only four faith groups

chose to set aside time for focused discussion of their faith during the Parliament, the

German Evangelical Church on September 24, the Anglican Church and the Free Baptist

Church on the 25th,

and the Baptists on the 27th

.

Rooms were also set apart for religious groups to answer inquiries from the public and,

presumably, delegates of other religious traditions. Barrows noted that Catholics and

Buddhists were kept busy answering questions.34

In the Catholic case, Keane reported

that priests and lay volunteers were available all day to provide information about the

Catholic faith and more than 18,000 books, pamphlets and tracts were distributed. There

was also a daily Catholic public lecture at 4:00 pm addressing questions deposited in a

question box or raised directly from the floor related to the themes addressed in the

general sessions of the Parliament.35

32 Seager, The Dawn of Religious Pluralism, 153.

33 See detailed chronicle of the Catholic Day in Appendix B.

34 Barrows, The World’s Parliament, II, 1559.

35 Cleary, “Catholic Participation in the World’s Parliament of Religions,” 597.

59

Interestingly, an alternative interpretation of these activities is offered by Vendantist

convert Marie Louise Burke. She claims placards were conspicuously located in the Art

Palace stating that “questions regarding Catholic faith would be answered in room six”

and adds that the office was set aside to assist any Catholics who may have been

unsettled by the papers of the Pagan, Protestant or Agnostic delegates, so that they could

be straightened out before they could leave the building. According to Burke, rather than

reaching out to non-Catholics, the Catholic Church was instead trying to correct and

protect the faithful from any damage provoked by exposure to ideas and doctrines that

challenged their own.36

A Catholic dissenter who was not invited

Despite the spectrum of religious traditions and theological views displayed at the

Parliament, not everyone was welcome as a delegate. Barrows emphatically stated that

“the Parliament was rigidly purged from cranks. Many minor sects, however, tried

earnestly to secure a representation, for which there was neither time nor fitness.”37

Black

Americans were poorly represented while Mormons and Native Americans were not

invited.38

A notable controversial figure who was not invited either –despite being

located in the geographic surroundings of the Parliament, in Green Bay, Wisconsin- was

Joseph René Vilatte, one of the most unique cases of intra- and inter-denominational

migration in the history of Christianity.39

Born into a French family that adhered to the

Petite Église, detached from Rome, he was received into the Catholic Church, in which

he became in turn a novice of the Brothers of the Christian Schools and a diocesan

36 Marie Louise Burke, Swami Vivekananda in the West, Part One: His Prophetic Mission

(Calcutta: Advaita Arshrama, 1985), 119-120.

37 Barrows, The World’s Parliament, II, 1561.

38 Seager, The Dawn of Religious Pluralism, 6; Seager, “Pluralism and the American

Mainstream,” in A Museum of Faiths, ed. Ziolkowski, 208.

39 For specific reference to Vilatte and the Parliament, see Peter F. Anson, Bishops at Large

(London: Faber and Faber, 1964), 111. Anson devotes two full chapters to Vilatte and the

Churches claiming the Vilatte succession, 91-129, 252-322.

60

seminarian in Belgium, a student of the Holy Cross Fathers in Canada, a scholastic of the

Clerics of St. Viator in the United States, and eventually a repentant guest in a

Benedictine monastery in France. But his religious search was far from over. He was also

a convert to Protestantism in Canada, served as a Presbyterian minister in the USA,

received orders in the Old Catholic Church in Europe, reported to an Episcopal Bishop in

the United States, and was received in the Russian Orthodox Church until he managed to

be consecrated as a bishop according to the Syrian rite by a schismatic bishop in Ceylon.

Eventually, he returned to the United States as the Archbishop Primate of the Old

Catholic Church in America where he won over followers from different dissident

Catholic groups, the Polish Catholic Church among them.

A critical issue for the Catholic Church was that Vilatte allegedly received valid orders

(valid, although not licit according to long-established church law) and, therefore, had the

power to confer them upon others. And he did so. He ordained not only priests, but a

number of bishops in North America and Europe, raising several irregular claims of

apostolic succession and authenticity that have survived until today. His relationship with

the Catholic Church also continued. He later several times contacted Archbishop Satolli,

the Apostolic Delegate to America, asking to be reconciled with the Catholic Church,

only to relapse and continue to freely exercise his episcopal powers. Interestingly, he

spent the last period of his life in a Catholic monastery in France where he eventually

died.40

Of course, a character like Vilatte embodied the worst possible nightmare about

religious indifferentism for a Catholic mind. As a result, he was kept at the margins of the

Parliament.

40 There is a dossier about him in the historical archives of the Propaganda Fide with relevant

correspondence from prominent prelates related to his case, such as Cardinal Satolli, Cardinal

Richard from Paris, Archbishop Bonjean from Colombo, Ceylon, Bishop Messmer from Green

Bay, as well as personnel from the Supreme Congregation of the Holy Office in the Vatican.

ASPF, NS, Vol. 159, Giuseppe Renato Vilatte, sedicente vescovo, protocols 14401, 16914,

18226, 19707, 30256, 30634, 31252, 31918, 32151, 32191, 32884, 36429, 36877.

61

Adjournment of the Parliament

After seventeen intense and exhausting days of direct interaction and meetings, and four

years after Charles Carroll Bonney first posed the idea for a World’s Parliament of

Religions, the event concluded. On Thursday, September 28, more than 7,000 persons –-

many imbued with a Pentecostal spirit-- crowded the Columbus and Washington Halls in

the Memorial Arts Palace in Chicago. The platform was crowded with 50 distinguished

delegates, twenty-one of whom were scheduled to offer brief remarks. Twelve were from

overseas and eight of them were non-Christian. Among the non-speakers there were ten

different countries represented. The Hallelluiah chorus from Handel’s oratorio The

Messiah, interpreted by Chicago’s 500-voice Apollo Choir, added majesty to the

occasion. Catholic representation consisted of Bishop John Moore (1835-1901), from St.

Augustine, Florida, among the non-speakers, and Bishop Keane, the tireless architect of

Catholic participation, among the speakers. Whether intended or not, Bishop Moore’s

presence was charged with symbolism, considering the historical significance of the city

of St. Augustine for Catholic America. Jesuit historian Charles Gallagher reports that

“over half a century before the English landed at James Town in 1607 and Pilgrims at

Plymouth Rock in 1620, Spanish Catholics had explored, settled and fortified the small

city of St. Augustine on Florida’s northeast coast.” Moore’s presence underscored the

Catholic claim that Catholicism was a foundational building block of America.41

Another subtle Catholic feature of the closing ceremony was the singing of a hymn

composed by Cardinal John Henry Newman, perhaps the most famous of Anglican

converts to Catholicism, which added to the discreet but consistent Catholic self-

affirmation in this ecumenical and inter-religious context. The strength of Catholic

involvement in the Parliament and the quality of Bishop Keane’s partnership with

Barrows was reflected in the protocol decision to have Keane as the last person to address

the audience, immediately before John Barrows, the Chairman of the Parliament, and

41 On this claim, see Charles Gallagher, “Catholicism in Florida” Diocese of Saint Augustine

Website, accessed June 25, 2012, http://www.dosafl.com/NavLanding.asp?ID=188.

62

Charles Carroll Bonney, the President of the World’s Congress Auxiliary and the source

of the Parliament idea. Keane took this opportunity to assert the natural right and duty of

the Catholic Church to be there, based on its antiquity, seniority and universality.

When the invitation to this Parliament was sent to the old Catholic Church, and

she was asked if she would come here, people said: Will she come? And the old

Catholic Church said: Who has as good a right to come to a Parliament of all the

Religions of the world as the old Catholic Universal Church?

Then people said: “But if the old Catholic Church comes here, will she find

anybody else here? And the old Church said: “Even if she has to stand alone on

that platform, she will stand on it.”42

Once the speeches were ended and Rabbi Hirsch of Chicago led the assembly in the

Lord’s Prayer, Keane was granted the honor of conducting the very last act of the

Parliament. He offered a benediction.

The risky enterprise of the Parliament of Religions was over. Keane’s call to the Catholic

Archbishops, “Can we afford not to be there?”, the year before had been amply

responded to by a Catholic retinue that –including all the Parliament activities beyond the

general program- assembled a cardinal, five archbishops, four bishops, fourteen priests,

two religious brothers, and six laymen for a total of thirty Catholics. This organic and

sound Catholic representation, without the flashes and headlines generated by more

exotic participants in the Parliament, particularly the remarkable visitors from the East,

signaled a symbolic rite of passage for the Catholic Church in America. It made the case

that the American Catholic Church was no longer a stranger or a newcomer to the

building of the United States. And the Catholic delegation showed the coming of age of a

robust body encompassing nineteen cities from thirteen states and the District of

Columbia as well as Belgium, France and New Zealand, a geographic scope equivalent to

that of the Columbian Catholic Congress preceding the Parliament. Perhaps the most

impressive aspect of the Catholic participation in the Parliament was that the Catholic

42 Mary Eleanor Barrows, John Henry Barrows: A Memoir (Chicago, Fleming H. Revell

Company, 1904), 182.

63

Church was the only Christian body officially represented as a result of a formal and

consultative decision made by the Board of the Archbishops of the United States. All

others attended as individuals, some with approval of their religious institutional home

and others without.

It has been argued that the Parliament could only take place because it was the initiative

of interested, mostly liberal-minded individuals under the aegis of a secular organizing

body, the Chicago Exhibition, and the cooperation of the American government, also a

secular entity. Barrows made it clear in the early stages of planning: “The Committee

made its appeal to individuals [to attend] and not to organizations.”43

However, the

Catholic Church managed to be there as an institutional entity despite its own internal

struggles about its participation in the Parliament, and indeed about its relationship to

American democratic culture as a whole. The only other institutions officially represented

in the Parliament were the Imperial Government of China, the Buddhist Church of

Southern India, and the Brahmo Somaj, the Jains, and the Kayasth Society, also from

India.44

The uniqueness of Catholic involvement in the Parliament did not go unnoticed among

Protestant observers. Dr. Theodore Thornton Munger, a Congregational clergyman and

graduate from Yale observed: “By far the most notable feature of the Parliament was the

participation of the Catholic Church and the presence of its ablest representatives in this

country, and the earnest and genuine catholicity with which they entered into its

deliberations.”45

43 Barrows, The World’s Parliament, I, 60.

44 Barrows, The World’s Parliament, II, 1568.

45 The Christian World, London, cited by Barrows, The World’s Parliament, II, 1572.

64

The Parliament in itself was a remarkable endeavor for its time. Keane proclaimed “the

Parliament accomplished itself.”46

If for the Catholic Church it signaled its entry into the

American mainstream, for the Eastern religions it represented their entry into North

America. The arrival in Chicago of the representatives of oriental religions constituted

the first time most local residents and Parliament delegates had contact with people so

different in outlook and worldview. Most were received as short-term visitors. Diana

Eck, Professor of Comparative Religion at Harvard, notes that American immigration

regulations made it difficult, even impossible, for them to remain.47

They and their

unusual attires fired the curiosity of many and filled the front pages of the local

newspapers. The American environment and culture were equally new and young to them

in comparison to their millenary traditions. Martin Marty, Professor of History of

Christianity at the University of Chicago, describes the Parliament as “the most elaborate

display of religious cosmopolitanism yet seen on the continent.”48

But above all, it was

an opportunity to realize in the West, even on an era of western colonialism of culturally

different lands and peoples, how little was known about the religions of the East. The

discovery of the intellectual sophistication of the Eastern religious traditions meant they

could no longer be simply dismissed as the religions of heathens or idolaters. They would

more and more be reclaimed as the philosophy religions, particularly Hindu Vedanta and

Buddhism.49

Seager states that their presence in Chicago “marked the beginning of a full-

scale Asian mission to the Western nations.”50

Furthermore, Eastern religions presented

themselves as alternative, valid paths for seekers of truth to explore and follow. As

Swami Vivekananda stated in the closing session of the Parliament: “Holiness, purity and

charity are not the exclusive possession of any church in the world,” a statement that was

46 John Henry Barrows, “Results of the Parliament of Religions,” in A Museum of Faiths, ed. Eric

Ziolkowski, 144.

47 Diana Eck, foreword to The Dawn of Religious Pluralism, ed. Seager, xvi.

48 Cited by Ziolkowski, A Museum of Faiths, 5.

49 Clay Lancaster, Incredible World’s Parliament of Religions at the Chicago Columbian

Exposition of 1893: A Comparative and Critical Study (Fontwell: Diane Pub Co., 1987), 2-3

50 Seager, The Dawn of Religious Pluralism, 10.

65

met by disapproval from some members of the audience.51

Nor was it easy for Catholic

delegates to hear. The Catholic Church at the Parliament stretched itself to stand with this

unfamiliar company, Christian and non-Christian, side by side with members of other

religions and other Christian denominations, on the uncommon ground of their different

worldviews and the inclusivist relativism some of them promoted. Would there be a price

for doing so?

Mixed reactions

From its birth as an idea through its aftermath the Parliament of Religions generated

mixed reactions. On the one hand, the Parliament invited a mythologization that evoked

powerful biblical images in some of its supporters. Enthusiasts proclaimed it “the

defiance of the dispersion of the descendants of Noah at Babel,” an analogy to the vision

of the Transfiguration on Mount Tabor, a second Pentecost, the affirmation of Paul in the

Areopagus, or the realization of a New Jerusalem and a Celestial City.52

Others looked at

it as a “foretaste of universal brotherhood.”53

Parliament scholar Eric Ziolkowski states

further that the Parliament was “viewed as an axial event in the history of religious faiths,

American religious history, interfaith dialogue, and even general human history.”54

On the other hand, opponents of the Parliament viewed it as “a masterpiece of Satan” or

“a polytheistic symposium.” Furthermore, in addition to the anti-Catholic nativist

conspiracy theories about the Pope trying to crush Protestantism and take over America,

there were also antisemitic remarks denouncing the active and strong involvement of

Jews in the Parliament as the “lengthening of the cords of Zion.”55

51 Barrows, The World’s Parliament, I, 158-159.

52 Ziolkowski, A Museum of Faiths, 42, 19-20. References for these images are found in note 47.

53 Barrows, The World’s Parliament, II, 1557

54 Ziolkowski, A Museum of Faiths, 3.

55 Barrows, The World’s Parliament, II, 1557.

66

Catholics were also divided in their attitude toward the Parliament. While the overall

assessment of Catholic involvement in the Parliament was positive, there were also deep

concerns about the wisdom of Catholics having taken part. Even while the Parliament

was in progress, the Catholic press in the United States was divided on Catholic

participation. The Catholic Standard (Philadelphia), The Pilot (Boston), The

Northwestern Chronicle (St. Paul), The Western Catholic News (Chicago), and The

Catholic World (Paulist community) published favorable articles. The Western Watchman

and Church Progress (both from St. Louis) were very critical especially of Catholics

participating as equals with non-Catholics and even non-believers as if to give them and

their beliefs equal status with Catholicism. Condé Pallen, editor of the Church Progress,

wrote: “we cannot but feel the Catholic participators were made the victims of

circumstances. They were indiscriminately leveled with publicans and heathens in that

heterogeneous gathering making up a discordant babel of creeds.”56

Cleary adds that “a storm was brewing over the Catholic participation in the Parliament.”

But the Parliament was just one element in a complex web of issues that divided the

Catholic Church in the United States during the last decades of the nineteenth century.

One of these issues was the relation to Protestants. The Parliament was perhaps the most

articulate and systematic cooperative mingling of Catholics with Protestants in American

history, an engagement that challenged the classical binary opposition that defined

Catholic identity against the Protestant other—an attitude that then prevailed in many

sectors of the Catholic Church. While there were several examples of a positive rapport

between Catholics and Protestants prior to the Parliament, particularly in the Midwest

where Protestants and Catholics stood side-by-side as pioneers and shared a sense of

ownership in the expansion of the American Frontier, this was mostly regarded as the

exception.57

56 Cited by Cleary, “Catholic Participation in the World’s Parliament of Religions,” 599.

57 Bishop Edward Dominic Fenwick and Archbishop John Baptist Purcell in Cincinnati, Ohio, in

the 1820s and 30s are examples of this exception. See Margaret C. DePalma, Dialogue on the

67

The dangers of fraternizing with Protestants also ran through the Catholic school

controversy and the uproar over membership in secret societies. Some Catholics saw their

parochial schools as a haven where Catholics could be protected from the negative

influences of Protestantism or un-Catholic American values. Others advocated a closer

relation to public education as a necessary step for Catholics to fully adapt and be

accepted into American society. Closely linked to the school controversy was the desire,

led by German Catholics, to preserve ethno-Catholic heritage, languages and traditions.

For many immigrant Catholics sending their children to ethno-religious schools protected

them against religious and cultural erosion. Membership in secret societies and their

secret rituals of initiation, on the other hand, were a vivid reminder of anti-Catholic

Masonry. Some feared these societies could alienate members from their parishes and the

good influence of the clergy.

On these issues conservative Catholics looked to the leadership of Archbishop Michael

Corrigan of New York (1839-1902).58

Corrigan was not shy to assert his convictions and

use all his power to enforce his views. As an example, at the Columbian Catholic

Congress in Chicago that preceded the Parliament and which aimed at building bridges

between Catholic faith and American freedom and democracy, in a dramatic contrast

with the rest of the program Corrigan chose to give a lecture on the Holy Inquisition.59

Corrigan also faced a difficult relationship with Archbishop Francesco Satolli, the first

apostolic delegate, who originally sided with the progressives. Corrigan even complained

to Rome about Satolli’s deliberate distance and opposition to him.60

Despite the eventual

improvement in his relations with Satolli, Corrigan is the only Archbishop of New York

Frontier, Catholic and Protestant Relation, 1793-1893 (Kent, Ohio: The Kent State University

Press, 2004), xii.

58 See Robert Emmet Curran, S. J., Michael Augustine Corrigan and the Shaping of Conservative

Catholicism in America, 1878-1902 (New York: Arno Press, 1978), 547.

59 Barrows, The World’s Parliament, II, 1418.

60 Corrigan to Ledochowski, May 26, 1893, ASPF, NS, vol 27, p. 352.

68

in the history of that important diocese who was never elevated to the cardinalate after his

predecessor, John Cardinal McCloskey, got that honor for the particular see.

Interestingly, that honor was never bestowed upon Archbishop Ireland either, despite

constant rumors about it. Another important member of the conservative group was

Corrigan’s mentor and friend,61

Bishop Bernard McQuaid (1823-1909) of Rochester,

NY.62

McQuaid’s clashes with Archbishop Ireland were widely known and eventually

forced Vatican intervention.63

Another prominent prelate clearly identified with the

conservative agenda was Archbishop Francis Katzer (1844-1903) of Milwaukee,

Wisconsin.64

Born in Austria, he was an important defender of German Catholic interests

both in his diocese and beyond.

Prominent liberal Catholic personalities in the United States were actually involved in

organizing Catholic participation in the Columbian Exhibition and the Parliament of

Religions. Among them were Archbishop Ireland and Bishop Keane, with the favor and

support of Cardinal Gibbons, who –given his position as Primate of the American

bishops-- also had to show a neutral face so as to serve as conciliator between the

opposing parties. But Gibbons’ progressive leanings could not be easily hidden. Another

key figure in the liberal group was Monsignor Denis O’Connell (1839-1927), the Rector

61 For the relationship between Corrigan and McQuaid see Frederick J. Zwierlein, D. Sc. M. H.,

Letters of Archbishop Corrigan to Bishop McQuaid and Allied Documents (Rochester, NY: The

Art Print Shop, 1946), 229.

62 See Frederick J. Zwierlein, The Life and Letters of Bishop McQuaid (Rochester: The art Print

Shop, 1925, 1926, 1927), Three volumes.

63 Satolli submits newspaper article from Democrat and Chronicle, Monday, November 26, 1894

about complaints from McQuaid against Ireland. ASPF, NS, vol. 74, p. 577.

64 Benjamin Joseph Blied, Three archbishops of Milwaukee: Michael Heiss (1818-1890)

Frederick Katzer (1844-1903) Sebastian Messmer (1847-1930), (Milwaukee: Archdiocese of

Milwaukee, 1955), 160.

69

of the American College in Rome and the agent of the American Bishops to the

Vatican.65

While the classical tension between conservatives and progressives divided the Catholic

hierarchy in the United States in the last two decades of the nineteenth century, historian

Jay P. Dolan warns about the danger of misrepresenting the complexity of the people

involved on either side.66

The divide between the two camps was not always clear.

Ireland, for example, the quintessential liberal bishop of the time and the utmost defender

of opening the door to Catholic engagement with American democracy, often referred to

the episcopal office and government in the most regal terms. In his correspondence, he

refers to the see of a bishop as a throne.67

The same is true of Bishop McQuaid, who

opposed Rome in its decision to send a papal representative to the United States.68

And,

despite their marked differences, this was one thing on which conservative and liberal

bishops agreed. They both felt uncomfortable with the Vatican’s decision to appoint an

apostolic delegate to the United States. They saw this as a Vatican attempt to interfere in

their affairs and exert control over their decisions. Ignoring opposition, the Vatican

appointed Francesco Satolli.69

Satolli was present in Chicago at the time of the Parliament. He visited the Columbian

Exhibition and participated in the Columbian Catholic Congress that took place just

before the Parliament. However, he did not set foot at the Parliament, a fact that historian

65 Gerald P. Fogarty, S.J., The Vatican and the Americanist Crisis: Denis J. O´Connell, American

Agent in Rome, 1885-1903, (Rome: Università Gregoriana Editrice, 1974), 357.

66 Jay P. Dolan, The American Catholic Experience (New York: Doubleday, 1985), 312.

67 Ahern offers many instances in his life of Bishop Keane, when Archbishop Ireland was looking

after an episcopal assignment for his friend. Interestingly, until recent years any bishop’s

residence would be called a palace, in which there was a hall of the throne.

68 John Tracy Ellis, The Life of James Cardinal Gibbons, Archbishop of Baltimore, Volume I

(Milwaukee: The Bruce Publishing Company, 1952), 600-601.

69 There is not a comprehensive biography of Satolli in English. For a Canadian perspective on

Satolli see Louis-Ad. Paquet, Un chapitre d’histoire contemporaine-Le cardinal Satolli (Ottawa:

Printed for the Royal Society of Canada, 1916).

70

Thomas McAvoy emphasized by stating that the Delegate “refused” to participate.70

While Ireland’s biographer, Marvin R. O’Connell, mistakenly alleges that Satolli

attended the Parliament in the company of Archbishop Ireland, O’Connell is correct in

noting the Delegate’s discomfort with the event: “Nothing Francesco Satolli had

experienced in Perugia or Rome had prepared him for the spectacle of Catholic prelates

mingling on professionally equal terms with all conceivable varieties of heathen.”71

Upon his return home in Washington, on October 6, 1893, Satolli wrote to Cardinal

Miescislao Ledochowski, the prefect of the Congregation of Propagation of the Faith, on

his own assessment of the event he did not attend. He referred to the idea of a Parliament

of Religions as an unhappy venture for the Catholic Church, noting that the president of

the event was a Protestant, and highlighted that all errors from all religions were

pronounced. At the same time, Satolli conceded that the program developed in an orderly

fashion –grazie al Cielo procedè tutto con ordine-- and described Catholic involvement

in positive terms, but not without raising the threat of religious indifferentism.72

Gibbons also began to feel uneasy about the potential blowback against Catholic

involvement in the Parliament, despite some supportive messages he received from

distinguished Europeans, including Fr. Kenelm Vaugham, the English writer, and Canon

Salvatore di Bartolo of Palermo who wrote: “You have wonderfully opened a new era in

the history of the Catholic Church by your presence and discourse at the Congress of

Religions.” However, these remarks came from someone who got himself into trouble

with the publication of a book, Les critères theologiques (Paris, 1889), which earned a

place on the Index in May, 1891. Therefore, fearing a Vatican anti-Parliament backlash

70 Thomas T. McAvoy, C.S.C., A History of the Catholic Church in the United States (Notre

Dame, Ind.: University of Notre Dame Press, 1969), 310. The absence of the Delegate from the

Parliament was confirmed by the same Satolli in correspondence to Rome when he wrote from

Washington that he went from Chicago to Milwaukee, Green Bay, Dubuque and Pittsburgh.

Satolli to Ledochowski, September 26, 1893, ASPF, NS, vol. 10, p. 221.

71 Marvin R. O’Connell, John Ireland and the American Catholic Church (St. Paul: Minnesota

Historical Society Press, 1988), 388. 72

Satolli to Ledochowski, October 6, 1893, ASPF, NS, vol. 10, p. 89.

71

Cardinal Gibbons decided to send a preemptive letter in French to Cardinal Rampolla,

making it clear that the Parliament had not been a Catholic initiative and detailing

Catholic involvement. The Secretary of State replied praising the Cardinal’s discretion

and the positive results of Catholic involvement, but also cautioning Gibbons to be

mindful of any delicate and perilous side effects. Gibbons did not have to wait long.73

A Methodist minister’s call to the Pope

Cardinal Rampolla was right about unavoidable and sometimes unpredictable

consequences of Catholic exposure to the pluralist American religious public square.

While exposure might facilitate information exchange and even recognition and

admiration of Catholic particularism, there was also the danger it would expose Catholics

to negative scrutiny. On the positive side, Pope Leo XIII cast a positive image in some

non-Catholic quarters. A symbolic gesture of outreach to the Pope was made by Grover

Cleveland, the President of the United States. He sent a copy of the American

Constitution to the Pope on the occasion of the anniversary of his priestly ordination in

1887.74

Rev. John Lee, a Methodist minister from Chicago, for one, was also deeply impressed

by the new image of the Catholic Church presented by Catholic leaders such as

Archbishop Ireland and even Archbishop Satolli during the Columbian events. But Lee

misread how broadly the spirit of Catholic openness ran. Lee was deeply concerned about

the situation of Protestant missionaries, laboring under oppressive disabilities in Peru,

Ecuador and Bolivia, who could not even legally marry in those Catholic lands.75

Lee

73 Ellis, The Life of James Cardinal Gibbons, II, 20, 21 (notes 52 and 53).

74 Oscar Köhler, “The World Plan of Leo XIII: Goals and Methods,” in History of the Church,

Volume IX: The Church in the Industrial Age, ed. Hubert Jedin and John Dolan (New York:

Crossroad, 1981), 13. 75

For a specific study addressing the establishment of Methodism in South America and their

struggle for religious freedom in education, see Rosa del Carmen Bruno-Jofre, Methodist

Education in Peru, Social Gospel, Politics, and American Ideological and Economic Penetration,

1888-1930 (Waterloo, Ontario: Wilfred Laurier University Press, 1988). For a general survey

72

and a number of fellow Methodist ministers met on April 2, 1894 and adopted a

resolution that they sent to Satolli to be forwarded to the Pope asking for his immediate

intervention:

WHEREAS, Our Roman Catholic fellow-citizens have repeatedly and

emphatically professed that their Church, as a Church, is heartily in sympathy

with the kind of religious freedom and liberty of conscience that obtains in these

United States.

In view of the repeated and warm approval, by the clergy and laymen of the

Roman Catholic Church in this country, of religious freedom, as existing by law

in these United States, we respectfully and earnestly request that the proper

authorities of that Church use their good offices, under the direction of Pope Leo

XIII, to secure for the Protestants of Peru, Ecuador and Bolivia, the same liberty

of conscience that is enjoyed by Roman Catholic citizens in this country.

This resolution was accompanied by a note addressing Pope Leo in the most familiar and,

given papal protocol, naïve terms.

I enclose an envelope addressed to myself with Italian stamps on it sufficient for

postage and registration in which you can enclose whatever reply you deem wise

to make.

That the rich blessing of God may ever rest on you is the earnest prayer of your

Protestant brothers.76

In a previous letter Lee claimed: “A special communication” of Pope Leo XIII “will

secure for the Protestants of Ecuador, Peru and Bolivia the same liberty of conscience

that is enjoyed by Roman Catholic citizens in this country. It will do more. It will secure

for Leo XIII a higher place in public thought in this great and free country than anything

the great Pontiff of the nineteenth century ever penned.”77

from a larger Protestant perspective, see Hans-Jurgen Prien, La Historia del Cristianismo en

América Latina (Salamanca: Ediciones Sígueme, 1985), 711-808.

76 Lee to Pope Leo XIII, August 24, 1894, ASPF, NS, Volume 36, p. 64.

77 Lee to Satolli, July 12, 1894, ASPF, NS, Volume 36, p. 79.

73

Satolli replied to Lee: “Your letter of June 22nd

and document dated July 12th

came duly

to hand. The inclosed [sic] copy of the Encyclical Letter of our Holy Father is, I think, the

most fitting reply I can make.”78

The encyclical Praeclara was enclosed. Clearly, in the

same way some Catholic Bishops of America saw in the Parliament an opportunity to

break into mainstream American culture, the Methodist ministers of Chicago saw in the

Catholic Church’s exposure an opportunity to further Protestant interests in South

America. This Methodist initiative sparked criticism from Fr. Louis Lambert, the editor

of The New York Freeman’s Journal, a Catholic publication, to which Lee replied in kind

in the Methodist Review.79

Toronto’s little Congress on Religion and Education

Satolli was also concerned about the fact that the reported “success” of the Parliament of

Religions would lead to similar gatherings. He was right. In July, 1895, a Pan-American

Congress on Religion and Education was held in Toronto, which, in a letter to Rampolla,

the Vatican Delegate mistakenly locates in Ottawa.80

This much smaller and lesser

known parliament of religions also counted on Catholic participation, both from English

Canada and the United States. The Toronto Globe reported, “The days of mutual

suspicion and exclusion seem to be gone for ever. Roman Catholics, Anglicans,

78 Satolli to Lee, July 31, 1894, ASPF, NS, Volume 36, p. 102.

79 John Lee, “Should Methodists “sing low?” The Methodist Review, 13 (1897): 531-544.

Interestingly, Fr. Lambert’s criticism of the Methodist initiative and defense of Catholicism

stands in opposition to his ecumenical spirit and the defiance of his own bishop, Bernard

McQuaid, when Lambert attended Toronto’s Pan-American Congress on Religion and Education

two years earlier in 1895. Eventually the Methodist cause succeeded in its goal at least in Bolivia,

but not because of Vatican concessions. As a result of domestic political upheaval, in 1906 the

constitution of Bolivia was amended and freedom of religion was proclaimed. For a complete

treatment of this issue from a Protestant point of view, see John Lee, Religious Liberty in South

America, (Cincinnati: Jennings, 1907).

80 Satolli to Rampolla, Washington, August 12, 1895, ASV, SS, 1897, Rubric 280, Fasc. 4, p. 60,

n. 26372.

74

Presbyterians, Methodists, Congregationalists, Baptists, Unitarians and Hebrews are all

found in its programme.” 81

The Congress opened at the Pavilion in the Horticultural Gardens on Thursday, July 18

and ran until Thursday, July 25, 1895. The program included sections on Missions,

Education, Philanthropy, and Young People. Among the American delegates were

Protestant Episcopal Bishop Gilbert of Minnesota and Rev. H. W. Bennett of Akron,

Ohio. The Congress also attracted prominent Canadian Protestants, including Chancellor

Nathaniel Burwash of Victoria University, who was one of few Canadians involved in the

Chicago Parliament of Religions.

There were three addresses delivered by Catholics, including one by Dean Harris,

described as “the most prolific Catholic author of his generation in English-speaking

Canada.”82

. Toronto’s Catholic Register reported that “the most striking address of the

week was the one given … by Dean William Richard Harris of St. Catherine’s on the

missionary work of the Catholic Church.”83

The second Catholic address was read by Rev. Thomas James Conaty of Worcester,

Massachusetts, on “the Catholic Church in the Educational Movement.” The year after

his participation in this Congress, Conaty replaced Bishop John Keane as the rector of the

Catholic University of America in Washington after Keane was deposed as rector in the

midst of the conservative/liberal tensions of the Catholic Church in America. Five years

81 The Globe, Toronto. Saturday, July 20, 1895, 7. The newspaper published daily the

proceedings of the entire congress from beginning to end.

82 Michael Power, “An Introduction to the Life and Work of Dean Harris 1847-1923,” in

Catholics at the “Gathering Place”: Historical Essays on the Archdiocese of Toronto 1841-1991,

ed. Mark McGowan and Brian Clark (Toronto: Canadian Catholic Historical Association, 1993),

119. Power focuses on Harris’ character as a writer and does not refer to his involvement in the

Toronto Congress. Prior to Power’s article, Robert Scollard did report his participation in the

Congress in “Rev. William Richard Harris, 1846-1923,” Canadian Catholic Historical

Association Study Sessions, 41 (1974): 65-80, accessed June 25, 2012,

http://www.umanitoba.ca/colleges/st_pauls/ccha/Back%20Issues/CCHA1974/Scollard.pdf.

83 The Catholic Register, Thursday, July 25, 1895, 1.

75

later, Conaty was appointed bishop of the Diocese of Monterrey-Los Angeles. These

ecclesiastical promotions of Conaty cast doubts over scholarly suggestions that Keane’s

involvement in the Chicago Parliament was a factor in Keane’s dismissal as rector of the

university.84

The third Catholic address was offered by Fr. Ryan on “the Catholic Church and

Charity.” Fr. Ryan was the Rector of St. Michael’s Cathedral in Toronto. The

introduction to his address opened a window into the busy schedule of any regular

Catholic priest, which made even more remarkable Ryan’s availability to include in his

busy agenda the participation in the ecumenical Congress. Ryan explained, “Our learned

and eloquent Brother, the Rev. Dr. from Detroit told us this morning that there are

ministers of the seventh day and ministers of the seven days. I am a minister of the seven

days and indeed I may say of the seven nights, for after 14 hours of work a day I am

liable to a sick call anytime of the night.” Fr. Ryan’s words foretold one of the most

common arguments raised by Church leaders for not engaging in ecumenical or interfaith

work. He ended his speech encapsulating the spirit of the Congress with a distinctively

Canadian signature: “The Pan-American Congress may not convert the world. It will, we

hope, be the means of banishing ignorance, prejudice and bigotry from this Canada of

ours, of bringing religious peace and social harmony to our beloved country of which

Catholics have such reason to be proud.”85

Disappointment ensued when news arrived that Archbishop Ireland, who was expected

from St. Paul, Minnesota, to serve as a keynote speaker and partake the hospitality of St.

Michael’s Palace offered by Archbishop John Walsh of Toronto, could not attend. Father

Ryan offered the audience Archbishop Ireland’s regrets.86

But a prominent Catholic who

84 See Patrick Henry Ahern, The Life of John J. Keane, Educator and Archbishop, 1839-1918,

(Milwakee: The Bruce Publishing Company, 1955), 122, and Ziolkowski, A Museum of Faiths,

27.

85 The Catholic Register, Thursday, August 1, 1895, 1, 4.

86 The Globe, Toronto, Saturday, July 20, 1895, 7.

76

did attend was the Rev. Dr. Louis Lambert, a priest of the Diocese of Rochester, New

York, and the editor of the New York Freeman’s Journal. The Catholic Register reported

that “it was a great disappointment to many on the closing day of the Pan-American

Congress to go without an address from Lambert,” who had acted as chairman of the

Congress. Fr. Lambert attended the Congress despite his bishop’s disapproval. Bishop

Bernard McQuaid of Rochester had previously disapproved the Chicago Parliament,

which –in his own words- was attended by “every pretense of religious denomination

from Mohammedanism and Buddhism down to the lowest form of evangelicalism and

infidelity.” Of course, the Toronto Congress did not look any better to the eyes of the

bishop of the nearby diocese across Lake Ontario.87

At the conclusion of the Toronto Congress, The Globe and The Catholic Register differed

in their appraisal of the event. While The Globe candidly reported that the Congress was

“not a complete success,” marred by low attendance and the absence of the keynote

speaker,88

The Catholic Register assessed it in glowing terms:

From the Catholic point of view the Congress was nothing less than a signal

triumph. It brought about an introduction of ministers of all the denominations

within earshot of three or four typical Catholic priests… Remembering the

composition of the Congress, the educational influence… is decidedly profitable

and will assuredly bear fruit in creating a better understanding among the

community at large. In point of fact the Congress did not dissolve before this

feeling was expressed by resolution. Let us hope for and help its continuance. The

Catholic people of Canada have very good reason to appreciate the success of

their spokesmen at the Congress.”89

This optimistic assessment of the Toronto Congress must be read in the context of the

often tense relations between Protestants and Catholics in what was then a still very

87 Zwierlein, The Life and Letters of Bishop McQuaid, III, 239, 453.

88 The Globe, Wednesday, July 24, 1895, 2.

89 The Catholic Register, Thursday, August 1, 1895, Vol. III, No. 81, 4.

77

Orange Toronto, a relationship scarred by conflict and occasional violence. Any initiative

to improve relations was to be welcomed.90

European responses and Vatican discouragement

While these ecumenical and interfaith gatherings were unfolding in North America, great

enthusiasm was also developing in Europe for the idea of another Parliament of

Religions, this one in Paris, for which the Chicago Parliament was an inspiration and a

model. The proponents of such a Parliament hoped to hold it as part of the World’s

Exhibition planned for Paris in 1900. French Protestant intellectuals such as Albert and

Jean Réville had sent papers to be read at the Chicago Parliament, and Gaston Bonet-

Maury, one of the French delegates in Chicago, translated the Parliament proceedings

into French. The translation was welcomed, generating a favorable climate for a Paris

Parliament that –in the words of Catholic historian Gerald Fogarty- “captured the

imagination of French intellectuals.”91

Barrows’ speaking tour in Europe following the

Chicago Parliament and Archbishop Ireland’s prestige among progressive French

Catholics contributed to igniting the desire for a Paris Parliament.

But there were also opposing views on the idea of a Parliament in Europe. On August 26

1894, Fr. William Tapper, a former faculty member of the Catholic University of

America, denounced the Chicago Parliament at the Katolikentag, an assembly of

German-American Catholics gathered in Cologne. Two weeks later, at the Third

International Catholic Congress in Brussels, Bishop John Keane, who happened to be in

Europe at the time, defended the Chicago Parliament. However, his remarks did not

necessarily help the cause of a Paris gathering. Keane defended the Chicago event by

90 See John S. Moir, “Toronto’s Protestants and Their Perceptions of Their Roman Catholic

Neighbours,” in Catholics at the “Gathering Place”: Historical Essays on the Archdiocese of

Toronto 1841-1991, ed. Mark McGowan and Brian Clark (Toronto: Canadian Catholic Historical

Association, 1993), 313-340.

91 Gerald Fogarty (1985), The Vatican and the American Hierarchy from 1870 to 1965

(Wilmington, Del.: Michael Glazier, 1985), 140.

78

arguing that it had only been possible in the climate of American religious freedom, an

environment far different from that of Europe.92

Support of and opposition to a Parliament of Religions within French Catholic circles

created a state of tension and confusion that soon reached the Vatican. For his part, in his

second attempt to reach the Vatican, Barrows had taken the initiative to send, on April 4,

1994, a beautifully bound edition of the two volumes of his History of the Parliament to

Pope Leo through Cardinal Gibbons. The gift was personally presented to the Pope by

Monsignor Denis O’Connell, who wrote to Barrows offering him a detailed account of

the event.

‘Holy Father, I present you a history, not only unique in its kind, but absolutely

the only one ever written on this new subject, since the world began.’ ‘And what

is that?’ he inquired. ‘Your Holiness, The History of the Parliament of Religions.’

‘It is presented to you,’ I continued, ‘by the Reverend John Henry Barrows of

Chicago, President of the Parliament, who sent the work to London to have it

finished in this artistic manner for your Holiness.’ All his interest was awakened.

He inquired more about the Parliament, asked what part the Catholic Church had

taken in it and heard with pleasure that it was well represented. Then volume after

volume he turned over all the pages to see the illustrations, and asked me

explanations of the most striking ones. Finally, placing the volumes on his little

writing table, he charged me to write you his most cordial thanks and to assure

you that your present was most gratifying and that he appreciates very highly

what you have done.’

The letter from O’Connell to Barrows was in a way a response to the unanswered letter

Barrows had sent to Cardinal Rampolla two years earlier, soliciting Papal support for the

Chicago Parliament. And Barrows was plainly delighted at O’Connell’s letter. “I must

say that I read this letter with very deep interest. It was a compensation for much of the

hard labor and anxiety which I have undergone in the last four years. Just think of all my

labors with the dignitaries of the Catholic Church from the time when I called on

92 Cleary, “Catholic Participation in the World’s Parliament of Religions,” 602-603.

79

Archbishop Feehan in the spring of 1890 to this consummation of my work with the

benediction and thanks of the Pope of Rome.”93

Despite Pope Leo’s polite and even friendly response to Barrows, during the following

year an increasing uneasiness took a hold in the Vatican about Catholics mingling with

non-Catholics in North America. On August 12, 1895, the Vatican Delegate in the United

States wrote Rampolla asking the Holy See to make a formal and prohibitory

pronouncement about Catholic involvement in any ecumenical and interfaith congresses

that might take place on American and Canadian soil in the aftermath of the Chicago

Parliament of Religions.94

To add urgency to this request, on September 10, 1895, Le

Soleil du Midi wrongly reported on the prospect for a Paris Congress of Religions, stating

that the idea had the approval of the Pope.95

On September 14, just four days later, the

Cardinal Pro-Secretary of the Supreme Congregation of the Holy Office sent a copy of

the article to the Secretary of State for his action.96

It took Cardinal Rampolla just four

more days to have the Pope sign a resolution on Catholic participation in inter-faith

gatherings. In a letter addressed to Archbishop Francesco Satolli, on September 18, 1895

Pope Leo stated that while meetings of Catholics with non-Catholics had been prudently

tolerated (ad hunc diem prudenti silentio tolerati sunt), from that moment on such

meetings would be discouraged. Instead, it would be advisable that Catholics should hold

their congresses entirely separately (consultius tamen videatur si catholici homines suos

seorsum conventus agant) from non-Catholics. Arrangements could be made to invite

non-Catholics to take part as auditors so that they could benefit from Catholic wisdom

93 Mary Eleanor Barrows, John Henry Barrows, 308-309.

94 Satolli to Rampolla, August 12, 1895, ASV, SS, 1990, Rubric 248, Fasc. 1, p. 60, n. 26372.

95 “Le Parlement des religions,” Le Soleil du Midi, September 10, 1895, ASV, SS, 1990, Rubric

248, Fasc. 1, p. 25, n. 26343.

96 Fr. Giacinto Agnesi (per Monsignore Ayera) to Cardinal Rampolla, September 14, 1895, ASV,

SS, 1990, Rubric 248, Fasc. 1, p. 24, n. 26343.

80

and truth, but from now on all inter-faith gatherings were only to take place under

Catholic auspices and leadership.97

The Pope’s response in Latin was almost a literal translation of Satolli’s request in

Italian, which was obviously used by Cardinal Rampolla as a draft for Pope Leo’s

pronouncement. About two months later, Satolli was elevated to the Sacred College of

Cardinals. However, while Satolli’s agency and American interfaith gatherings were

crucial for the papal pronouncement, Cardinal Rampolla’s expeditious follow-up on

Satolli’s request was obviously strongly motivated by the pressure coming from France

around the Paris Parliament.

In the meantime, consultations and denunciations coming from France and the

Netherlands regarding the Paris Parliament continued. Ten days after the Papal

pronouncement was issued, prominent French intellectual Charles Benoist, from the

Revue des Deux Mondes, wrote to Cardinal Rampolla expressing his positive interest in

the Parliament and asking for clarification as to whether the event had the approval of the

Pope.98

Echoing Anglican rejection of the Chicago Parliament, Rampolla replied that in

principle the Holy See did not favor such congresses because the only true religion would

be placed at the same level as dissident religions. He enclosed the Pope’s pronouncement

in support of his response.99

The Secretary of State sent the same enclosure to Cardinal

François Richard, Archbishop of Paris, who had also inquired about the papal attitude to

a Paris Parliament.100

It is important to note that the Pope’s pronouncement was not a solemn condemnation,

not even an official disapproval. It was more a discouragement as was indicated by the

97 Pope Leo to Satolli, ASV, SS, September 18, 1897, Rubric 280, Fasc. 4, p. 58, n. 26372.

98 Benoist to Rampolla, Paris, September 28, 1895, ASV, SS, 1990, Rubric 248, Fasc. 1, p. 28, n.

26651.

99 Rampolla to Benoist, ASV, SS, 1990, Rubric 248, Fasc. 1, p. 30, n. 26651.

100 Rampolla to Richard, ASV, SS, 1990, Rubric 248, Fasc. 1, p. 32, n. 27401.

81

language chosen: “It would be more advisable…” Another relevant clarification relates to

the nature of the document in which the pronouncement was made. It was not a formal

decree of any kind nor an encyclical letter, but a regular letter addressed to Satolli in

response to the Delegate’s request. However, the letter was read as expressing the

opinion of the Vatican toward the Paris initiative and it was magnified by the adversaries

of the Parliament of Religions, specifically by Bishop McQuaid of Rochester, New York,

not as a caution but as a prohibition. McQuaid sent copies of the letter to the press.101

Concerns were also raised by Mgr. Francesco Carmassi, the Inter-nuncio in Amsterdam,

who denounced a speech of Abbé Victor Charbonel, a French Catholic priest deeply

committed to the idea of a Paris Parliament. Charbonel was accused of overstepping

himself by proposing the democratization of the Catholic Church and supporting the

Parliament idea.102

Charbonnel was admonished that the Church was not about to

democratize and it was not about to accord false religions a platform alongside itself, the

only true religion. Charbonnel eventually left the Church. He resisted any suggestion that

the failure to convene a Parliament in Paris was primarily due to his passionate but

exaggerated campaign in favor of it.103

Bishop Keane was proven right in his address to the Catholic Congress in Brussels a year

earlier. Europe was not America. In Europe the separation and even hostility between

Catholics and Protestants were still engrained in the general consciousness. This was far

less the case in America. Despite the tireless work of those in favor of the Paris

Parliament, the Catholic opposition prevailed. The Paris Parliament never took place.

Instead, the first International Congress on the History of Religions was organized, an

exclusively academic engagement of intellectuals and scholars. The negative role that the

Vatican played in the failure to convene a Parliament of Religions in Paris along the line

101 See Zwierlein, The Life and Letters of Bishop McQuaid, III, 238-239.

102 Mgr. Francesco Carmassi, Inter-nuntio in The Hague, Netherlands, to Rampolla, ASV, SS,

1990, Rubric 248, Fasc. 1, p. 28, p. 33, n. 30370.

103 Victor Charbonnel, “An explanation,” The Open Court Journal, 1 (1899): 36-44.

82

of that in Chicago was articulated by Professor Jean Réville, the secretary of the

substitute congress.

…it was the formal refusal of the Catholic church to take any part whatever in a

conference of such a character. This was really the deciding factor. In a country

like France where the vast majority of the people are, at least in name, professing

Roman Catholics, a parliament of religions in which no authorized representatives

of Catholicism took part would be doomed to failure from the start. It is a

remarkable fact that the same Catholic church which, in America, consented to

take a leading part in the Parliament of Religions at Chicago, should obstinately

refuse to do so in Europe, where it is in no wise constrained to make the same

concessions to the spirit of democracy.104

Reville’s take on the situation proved accurate. In opposition to more ecumenically-

minded Catholics, opponents to the Paris Parliament prevailed. Five years earlier,

Cardinal Guillaume Meignan –the Archbishop of Tours- had argued, “America is not

France. Neither her [America’s] people nor her clergy are like those in France. The fact

that something succeeded in the New World does not guarantee its success in France.”

And on a more theological note, Abbé Moreau, the vicar-general of the Diocese of

Langres, would later be cited as saying: “It is well and good to invite Protestants, Jews

and Orientals, but the Catholic Church has no place there. The supporters of the project

think that it will bring about tolerance, but tolerance in matters of dogma is heresy. The

Catholic Church, which alone possesses the truth, has nothing to learn from others, and

has no concession to make. It will be well and good for other religions, but the Catholic

Church is excluded by the very principle on which it lives.” 105

This attitude of Catholic exclusivity has long been a marked feature of Catholic identity

and a convenient differential, particularly in contexts where Catholics are a minority. It is

104 Prof. Jean Réville, “The International Congress of the History of Religions,” The Open Court

Journal, 5 (1900): 272.

105 Both quotations by James H. Moynihan, The Life of Archbishop John Ireland, (New York:

Harper and Brothers Publishers, 1953) 44, note 21, La Revue Blue, Paris, November 16, 1895.

83

not difficult to understand how challenging American notions of religious pluralism and

ecumenism were for Catholics in other contexts. Ecumenical contacts were an issue for

Catholics in South Asia on the occasion of the coronation of Edward VII as King and

Emperor of India. The controversy started with a letter of inquiry on January 6, 1902

from Bishop Francesco Pozzi of Khrishnagar, Bengal, asking the Vatican for advice

about Catholics attending services in Protestant Churches to mark the occasion. The

matter was submitted to the Holy Office which recommended that the Cardinal

Archbishop of Westminster in London, Herbert Vaughan, be asked for advice. The matter

even involved the Primate of Armagh in Ireland, Cardinal Michael Logue. Things got

still more complicated when the Archbishop of Calcutta, Brice Meuleman, sj, decided to

celebrate the Catholic mass in thanksgiving for the coronation instead of the Te Deum

that was prescribed, a breach denounced to the Vatican by the Apostolic Delegate in

India, Archbishop Ladislao Zaleski. This overlooked episode, buried in the Vatican

Archives, serves as a clear illustration that Catholic involvement in the Chicago

Parliament was not a matter taken lightly in the Vatican.106

The Parliament idea “on hold”

In America, the Parliament idea remained vivid in the minds of its Protestant organizers.

As the Parliament came to a close, many believed the Chicago Parliament would be the

first of a long series of similar ecumenical and interfaith events. “When the parliament

adjourned, it really began its permanent sessions. Its utterances have continued to echo

around the huge whispering-gallery of the world.” 107

Anticipation of subsequent events

led the Chicago Parliament to the establishment of the Religious Parliament Extension

Society under the leadership of Paul Carus, another outstanding participant in the

Parliament. This Society was mandated to support the planning of similar events. In

106 Coronation of Edward VII, ASPF, NS, Vol. 255. The following protocols contain detailed

information about the case: 47946, 48675, 48922, 49149, 49292, 49586, 50336, 50345, 51523,

53046, 54109, 54368, 56074, 57147. 107

Barrows, “Results of the Parliament,” 135, 139.

84

addition to the Paris initiative, there were also plans to hold congresses in Benares and

Jerusalem.

With the failure of the Paris proposal, Carus transferred his energy to planning for a

Parliament to be convened at the next World’s Expo on American soil scheduled for

Saint Louis, Missouri, April 30-December 1, 1904. In that hope, two years before the St.

Louis Fair was to open, Carus requested Satolli’s support of Catholic involvement.

Instead, Carus received a discouraging response from Satolli, whose earlier letter to Leo

XIII had shaped the negative Papal pronouncement on the matter. “It is my conviction,

which I frankly dare to express, that such a Parliament would only lead to skepticism and

to naturalism. I must declare that no Catholic, whatever his condition or rank in the

Church might be, should be allowed to take part or even sympathize with your work.”108

Satolli was no longer the Apostolic Delegate to the United States. He was writing from

Rome where a state of high vigilance regarding the United States was generated by the

Spanish American War in 1898, which was felt to put in jeopardy Catholic interests in

America’s newly conquered territories.109

Furthermore, discomfort in Vatican circles

about American Catholics trying to adapt the Church to the circumstances of the age and

to the open and democratic American way of life had prompted those circles to have the

Pope condemn in 1899 –through the letter Testem Benevolentiae- what was termed

Americanism.

A factor that led the Vatican to take this action was the emergence of an Americanist

movement in France. French Catholic Americo-philia suggested not only American

democracy as the best political system for other nations to imitate but also separation

between Church and State and freedom of religion as an ideal to be embraced. Despite

Pope Leo’s pro-democracy policy towards France earlier in the decade, democracy and

108 Moynihan, The Life of Archbishop John Ireland, 45. Note 24, Carus to Ireland, La Salle, Ill.,

October 8, 1902.

109 See Pollard, “Leo XIII and the United States of America, 1898-1903,” in The Papacy and the

New World Order, ed. Vincent Viaene (Leuven: Leuven University Press, 2005), 465.

85

Church-State separation were still looked at with suspicion in Vatican circles.110

Moreover, the translation into French of a widely read Life of Fr. Isaac Hecker, the

founder of the Paulists, ignited further interest in American Catholicism among French

Catholic progressives. This biography, written by Fr. Walter Elliott, one of the Catholic

delegates at the Chicago Parliament, included a prologue by French priest Felix Klein.

The prologue spoke of America in glowing terms that irritated anti-Americans in Europe,

among them Abbé Charles Maignen. In response, Maignen wrote an inflammatory book

attacking Fr. Hecker and calling into question his virtue.111

The fear of creeping French Americanism soon drew in the Pope. His letter Testem

Benevolentiae referred to Elliot’s controversial biography of Hecker and warned against

the new opinions “that, in order the more easily to bring over to Catholic doctrine those

who dissent from it, the Church ought to adapt herself somewhat to our advanced

civilization, and, relaxing her ancient rigor, show some indulgence to modern popular

theories and methods.” The Pope also noted there was a difference between a positive

Americanism and a negative one, and referred to the latter as raising “the suspicion that

there are some among you who conceive of and desire a church in America different

from that which is in the rest of the world.” 112

The papal letter included a series of

propositions under negative Americanism that were condemned as heretical. However, no

one was charged with being a heretic. Interestingly, this particular letter does not refer at

all to Catholics mingling with Protestants and attending inter-religious events. However,

110 For Pope Leo’s pro-democracy policy towards France, see Jacques Gadille, “The Failure to

Reconcile Catholics and the Republic in France,” in History of the Church, IX, ed. Jedin and

Dolan, 96-106. 111

Charles Maignen, Is Fr. Hecker a saint? (London: Burns and Oates, 1898).

112 Pope Leo XIII, Encyclical Letter “Testem Benevolentiae,” inThe Great Encyclical Letters of

Pope Leo XIII, translations from approved sources, with Preface by Rev. John J. Wynne, s.j.

(New York: Benziger Brothers, 1903) 442, 452.

86

Catholic historian Fr. Thomas McAvoy frames Catholic involvement in the Parliament

within the larger picture of Americanism.113

The reaction of the American bishops was one of total obedience to Rome. However, a

look at the minutes of the Annual Assembly of the Archbishops at which the matter was

addressed reveals great tension. The vote of Cardinal Gibbons broke a tie between the

prelates about launching an inquiry throughout the dioceses of the country in search of

evidence and clarification of Americanist charges in order to challenge Rome’s

indictment.114

The Cardinal’s prudence, humility and negative vote probably prevented

the issue from getting worse. In the end, the formulation of Americanism as a heresy

proved not to be too strong doctrinally. It looked more like the use of orthodoxy to

counteract the hetero-praxis of the experiments of the Catholic faith in democratic

America, such as Catholic involvement in the Chicago Parliament of Religions. Father

Klein, whose prologue to the biography of Fr. Hecker inflamed the controversy,

eventually dismissed Americanism as “a phantom heresy.”115

However, Testem Benevolentiae was not without impact. After the Americanist crisis,

conditions were no longer propitious for Catholic participation in another Parliament. The

position of the progressive Catholic bishops in the United States had been seriously

compromised by the sharp rebuke from Rome. Just as the Parliament of Paris failed to

crystallize without the support of the Catholic Church, the St. Louis Parliament also fell

through for the same reason. In Chicago, the Catholic Church had dared to cross

boundaries, standing next to Protestants, to women ministers of religion, and to Jews,

113 Thomas T. McAvoy, C.S.C., The Americanist Heresy in Roman Catholicism, 1895-1900

(Notre Dame, Ind.: University of Notre Dame Press, 1963), 83. The same framework was also

adopted by French scholar Albert Houtin, who devoted a full chapter to the Parliament of

Religions in his book on Americanism. See Albert Houtin, L'américanisme (Paris: É. Nourry,

1904), 105-128.

114 Minutes Annual Conference of the Archbishops of the United States, held at the Catholic

University of America, Washington, DC, October 12, 1899, ASV, Sezione II, Stati Uniti,

Posizione 34, Incontri annuali degli arcivescovi 1893-1896, 1894-1900.

115 Felix Klein, Une heresie fantome: L’Americanism (Paris, Plom, 1949).

87

Muslims, and representatives of the non-Abrahamic faiths. As Seager states, the

Parliament was “an event that was meant to be quintessentially modern.”116

In the wake

of the Chicago Parliament, the Catholic Church’s flirtation and “coqueting” –a word used

by several Parliament adversaries- with the modern age was to be halted. The Church was

enlisting all its might to launch a crusade against its new and most dangerous adversary:

modernity. It would take a long time before the Church would be willing and able to take

part in another interfaith gathering of the scale and diversity of the World’s Parliament of

Religions in Chicago.

116 Richard Hugues Seager, The World’s Parliament of Religions, The East/West Encounter,

Chicago, 1893 (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1995), 172.

88

“Let the fresh air come in:”

From Anti-Modernism to Aggiornamento

“I, [Name,] firmly embrace and accept each and every definition that has been set forth

and declared by the unerring teaching authority of the Church, especially those principal

truths which are directly opposed to the errors of this day.”1 With these words the

Sacrorum antistitum, also known as the Oath Against Modernism, begins. The Oath

encapsulates the Catholic Church’s crusade against the threat embodied in the ideas,

doctrines and opinions brought about by modern times and that challenged the Church’s

dogmas and authority. An effective way of dealing with this problem internally in the

Church was not only to crush dissent but to avoid diversity of opinions that might lead to

relativism and strife. Novelty, ambiguity and disagreement were to be avoided in favor of

tradition, utmost doctrinal precision, and consensus based on the supreme authority of

Rome. The contrasting attitudes inside the Catholic Church about the first Parliament of

Religions in Chicago and the Church’s involvement in the Parliament exemplified that

dangerous territory of internal diversity in the Church that might lead to

misunderstanding and ambiguity.

Despite this staunch resistance to modernity and the fight against modernism, as the

twentieth century advanced there were also counter-pressures for change unfolding inside

the Catholic Church. The Church could no longer simply ignore the signs of the times. A

shift from suspicion of modernity to engaging and reassessing modernity

(aggiornamento) was brewing.

Both resistance to and embracing of modernity might be better grasped if framed within

the Church’s relationship with culture at large, understood as the conglomerate of

1 “The Oath against Modernism,” The Franciscan Archive, accessed June 28, 2012,

http://www.franciscan-archive.org/bullarium/oath.html. From now on, “The Oath.”

89

economic systems, political institutions, legal instruments, social organizations,

philosophical and scientific frameworks, and non-orthodox religious ideas and practices

that could simply be called “the world”. The relationship between the Catholic Church

and culture is complex and long and it reflects an inter-dependence in which the Church

and its surrounding environments have shaped each other over the centuries.

A significant instrument for managing interactions between the Church and “the world”

has been the convocation of major or minor councils to discuss, discern and decide the

Church’s position and response to the challenges coming from outside, as well as regulate

its own internal issues. The last two major or ecumenical councils of the Catholic Church,

Vatican I (1869-1870) and Vatican II (1962-1965), bracket a century characterized by the

Church’s effort to cope with the hopes and fears, opportunities and threats posed by

modernity--issues that if not addressed could call the very identity and mission of the

Catholic Church into question and that required the Church to proceed with great caution,

discernment and historical responsibility.

This chapter intends to build a bridge of Catholic history between the first Parliament of

Religions in 1893 and the Centennial Parliament in 1993. It focuses on the struggle of the

Catholic Church with modernity, tracing the concrete campaign against what came to be

called “modernism” outside and inside the Church during the Anti-Modernist controversy

in the early twentieth century, and the Church’s transition from opposing to befriending

modernity, which found its climax in the Second Vatican Council. There are three

milestones in this historical journey. The first one is the Anti-Modernist crusade launched

by Pope Pius X, the immediate successor of Leo XIII, through the decree Lamentabili

Sane on July 3, 1907, a syllabus condemning the errors of the modernists; the encyclical

letter Pascendi Dominici Gregis on September 8, 1907, in which the Pontiff issued a

formal condemnation of modernism as a heresy; and the Oath against Modernism on

September 1, 1910. The second milestone is the Second Vatican Council (1962-1965)

and the specific promulgation among its sixteen documents of the dogmatic constitution

Lumen Gentium on November 21, 1964 about a new understanding of the Church as the

people of God; the pastoral constitution Gaudium et Spes on December 7, 1965 in which

90

the conciliar fathers of Vatican II articulate a new attitude towards modernity; and the

declaration Nostra Aetate on October 28, 1965 addressing the relation of the Church with

non-Christian religions. The third milestone is the World Day of Prayer for Peace, the

first inter-faith summit ever convened by a Pope, hosted by Pope John Paul II in Assisi

on October 27, 1986. The chapter is accordingly divided into three sections: the struggle

of the Catholic Church with modernity, the Second Vatican Council as a response to that

struggle, and the Catholic Church and other religions.

A new contemptus mundi: modernity as an enemy2

During the Tridentine era, the three-hundred year period between the Council of Trent

and the First Vatican Council, Europe experienced a multifaceted transformation that

would bring it to the forefront of intellectual, political and economic development

globally. But this process, as historian David Levine asserts, took root much earlier,

around the turn of the first millennium C.E.3 It flourished in the Renaissance and the

Humanist movement and unfolded throughout the nineteenth century.

The Renaissance shifted attention from the thinkers and authorities of Medieval

Christendom to a Classical Pre-Christian era. Erasmus’ Humanism moved beyond the

“untouchability” of the Sacred Scriptures into the philological dissection of language, an

avenue that gradually transformed the way in which Western intellectuals viewed the

Bible. With Descartes’ cogito ergo sum, epistemology gave metaphysics a veritable coup

d’etat in the realm of philosophy, a shift that sustained the rationalism of Spinoza and

Leibnitz and found its climax in the idealism of Kant and Hegel unleashing the Age of

Reason or Enlightenment. Hume’s empiricism precipitated the development of the

2 The following paragraphs in this sub-section are the writer’s personal recollections, summary

and assessment of commonly known historical events, people and movements in the history of

philosophy and modern history at large. General references are provided for an in-depth treatment

of the various topics addressed.

3 See David Levine, At the dawn of modernity: biology, culture, and material life in Europe after

the year 1000 (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2001).

91

modern scientific method. Copernicus, Galileo and Newton unveiled a new vision of the

universe that demoted the earth from its cosmological centrality and confined it to a

marginal and collateral position in a space that went from limited to limitless. In the same

spirit, Comte’s positivism not only considered religion to be a primitive interpretation of

reality but declared the caducity of philosophy by welcoming science as the new Messiah

of the modern world.4

Equally important, immigrants in the New World challenged the social predestination of

the Old World. While expanding the geographic frontier of America, the newcomers also

shifted borders into a more inclusive society in which freedom and prosperity based on

personal effort and achievement challenged inherited privilege. The American Revolution

applied this new paradigm to the political realm and laid down a milestone for the

development of modern democracy. The American Constitution followed, stripping

religion of its primacy in political affairs and making all faith groups compete as equals

in the marketplace of ideas. Similar ideas circulated in Europe and found a dramatic

expression in the cry in the Bastille for liberté, egalité et fraternité only a decade after the

American Revolution. The ensuing Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen

documented the spirit of freedom, unleashing new ideas in an old world. Both the

American and the French revolutions caused a domino effect across the Spanish

American colonies, which -one by one- within a short span of twenty years (1810-1830),

fought wars of independence and emancipated themselves from Spain.5 This also meant

that a vast and solid Catholic empire was falling apart and some new actors were taking

over, primarily anti-clerical France under Napoleon and his successors, and Anglican

(and multi-denominational) England, spreading its dominions and succeeding Spain as

4 See Guillermo Fraile, Historia de la Filosofía, Volumen III, Del Humanismo a la Ilustración

(Siglos XV-XVIII) (Madrid: Biblioteca de Autores Cristianos, 1978); Teófilo Urdanoz, Historia de

la Filosofía, Volumen IV, Siglo XIX: Kant, idealismo y espiritualismo (Madrid: Biblioteca de

Autores Cristianos, 1975); Teófilo Urdanoz, Historia de la Filosofía, Volumen V, Siglo XIX:

Socialismo, materialismo y positivismo. Kierkegaard y Nietzsche (Madrid: Biblioteca de Autores

Cristianos, 1975).

5 See Wim Klooster, Revolutions in the Atlantic world: a comparative history (New York: New

York University Press, 2009).

92

the world’s largest imperial power. In this context of political revolutions and

transformations, the Church of Rome would more and more rely on the Austro-

Hungarian Empire for protection and support.6

The feudal economy, with its stability and predictability, had been overcome by a

mercantilist system of trade and commerce that increased the wealth of those with

purchasing power. Modern capitalism began to evolve from the unrestricted generation of

wealth of those in charge of the mode and means of production, whose growing wealth

stood in stark contrast with the condition of those dependent on wage labor.

Technological developments also brought unprecedented changes to the economy and the

world of labor. Sophisticated equipment precipitated a shift from manual labor to

machine-based mass production. Reason, science, technology and wealth supported a

meta-narrative of progress that would lead society to a pinnacle of extraordinary

development. Adam Smith’s invisible hand was the symbol of a laissez-faire liberal

economy counterbalanced by state regulation in concerned systems. Marx’s Das Capital

offered an alternative meta-narrative of the redemption of the proletariat by demonizing

capitalism and envisioning a new era in which workers would become their own rulers

through state regulation for equal rights in a socialist-communist system that intended to

overcome capitalism. This alternative not only despised religion, the opium of the masses,

but endorsed materialism and atheism as necessary pre-conditions for a truly humanistic

freedom. Eventually, tensions between these two narratives –capitalism and socialism-

would polarize the economic and political landscape of the twentieth century.7

For a Church that perceived itself as the heir of antiquity and the preserver of culture and

tradition, for a Church that believed it alone filled the political vacuum left by the fall of

6 See Erika Weinzierl, “Tensions in the Austro-Hungarian Monarchy,” in History of the Church,

Volume IX: The Church in the Industrial Age, ed. Hubert Jedin and John Dolan (New York:

Crossroad, 1981), 45-54.

7 The survey by Emeritus Professor Elias H. Tuma, from the University of California at Davis, is

still a helpful overview. Elias H. Tuma, European economic history: tenth century to the present;

theory and history of economic change (New York : Harper & Row, 1971).

93

the Roman Empire through the claim of universal supremacy of the Pope, for a Church

that contributed to the formation of Europe in its feudal configuration through the spread

of labor-based monasticism and Saint Benedict’s ora et labora, the changes brought

about by modernity represented a series of seismic threats that shifted the crust in which

the Church felt immutably rooted.

For centuries, the Church had perceived “the world” as antagonistic to the realm of God,

that is the eternal heavens that should represent the deepest aspiration of any believer

who lives and weeps in hac lacrimarum valle (“in this valley of tears”).8 This dualism

managed to survive in the Church despite the Church’s acknowledgment of the goodness

of creation and of nature and the Church’s own rejection of extreme dualisms such as

Gnosticism, Pelagianism, Catharism, and Jansenism, which the Church condemned as

heretical at different times throughout history. The labeling of the world as negative,

suspicious and dangerous, something to be feared and fought against, was epitomized in

one of the most popular classics of medieval Christian spirituality, Thomas à Kempis’

Imitatio Christi (Imitation of Christ). It is seldom realized that the complete title of this

influential book included the phrase Contemptus Mundi, that is rejection of the world.9

By the mid-nineteenth century, that “world” had grown from a passive rival that could be

easily counteracted through rhetorical preaching and scholastically reduced to an enemy

of the soul10

to become a contender that threatened the very existence of the Church and

8 Salve Regina antiphon, Marian hymn, probably from the 11

th century, generally attributed to

Anselm of Lucca, Bernard of Clairveaux, or Hermann de Reichenau. See Anthony M. Buono,

The greatest Marian prayers: their history, meaning and usage (New York: Alba House, 1999),

49-54.

9 See James Edward Geoffrey De Montmorency, Thomas A Kempis, his age and book (Port

Washington, NY: Kennikat Press, 1970).

10 In classical Catholic catechisms, the world is listed as one of the three enemies of the soul. The

other two enemies are the devil and the flesh. This catalogue may be based on New Testament

sources, such as Paul’s letter to the Ephesians 2:1-3 or the first letter of John 2:14-17. The three

enemies of the soul are found in Christian theology as early as Peter Abelard, in his commentary

on the Lord’s Prayer, section “Lead us not into temptation:” “Quia autem sunt quae nos tentant,

caro, mundus, diabolus. Caro nos tentat per gulam et luxuriam: mundus per prospera et adversa:

per prospera ut decipiat, per adversa ut frangat. Diabolus omnibus modis nos agreditur, et ad

omnem nequitiam nos perducere conatur.” (There are three things which temp us, the flesh, the

94

religion at large. The “world” was no longer a child to be easily controlled, or demonized

if perceived as too powerful. It had come of age through modernity, and was now an

enemy of the Church to be feared and fought. However, the systematic fight against the

modern times that the Church would campaign in the early twentieth century stood in

contrast with the pontificate of Leo XIII, which took the first steps towards the encounter

of the Church with modernity.

The enemy inside de house: the heresy of the twentieth century

The long pontificate of Leo XIII, a quarter of a century from 1878 to 1903, bridged the

Catholic Church into the twentieth century. Pope Leo inherited a Church that no longer

had territorial possessions, although it remained in tension with the Italian Kingdom. This

tension between the Vatican and the Quirinal resulted in a papal order against Italian

Catholics participating in Italian elections, a measure intended to make a statement of

non-recognition of the Italian regime that had stripped the papacy of its temporal power.

However, while the Vatican was at odds with democratic procedures in Italy, Pope Leo

began to look with some favor on democracy in France during the Third Republic, a

pontifical policy known as ralliement, which caused a stir among more conservative and

anti-democratic Catholic sectors in France and other parts of Europe. Pope Leo also

looked favorably at democracy in America, although with reservations regarding the

separation between Church and State. Also an important step in the Church’s dialogue

with modernity and the democratic state was the publication of the encyclical Rerum

Novarum, on Capital and Labor.

world, and the devil. The flesh tempts us through gluttony and lust; the world through prosperity

and adversity; through prosperity by deceiving us, through adversity by crushing us. The devil

assaults us in every way and seeks to lead us to every wickedness-my imperfect translation). See

text in Wemer Robl, Peter Abaelard, Expositiones, September, 2002, accessed June 28, 2012,

http://www.abaelard.de/abaelard/050511expositio.htm. The author is grateful to Seth Schoen for

leading him to Abelard’s reference, accessed June 28, 2012,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Schoen/The_world,_the_flesh,_and_the_devil.

95

These preliminary steps of engaging democracy and the world of labor have gained for

Leo XIII the title of “the first modern pope.” It has been said that the program of his

pontificate was “the Christianization of modern life and the modernization of Christian

life.”11

However, these papal inroads into modernity were halted by his successor Pope

Pius X, whose name choice revealed a program for the Church more in tune with his

namesake Pius IX than with his immediate predecessor. As the motto of his pontificated

indicated (Instaurare omnia in Christo, to restore all things in Christ), his program was

one of restoration of tradition and not accommodation to modernity. As modern ideas

continued to bubble up at the dawn of the twentieth century and began to make inroads

into Catholic theology and practice, the Vatican attempted to contain if not eradicate the

influence of the modern spirit in Church life. Pius X took decisive action with the

endorsement on July 4, 1907 of the decree Lamentabili Sane, prepared by the Holy

Roman and Universal Inquisition, a document very similar in tone and purpose to the

Syllabus of Errors of Pius IX.12

With truly lamentable results, our age, casting aside all restraint in its search for

the ultimate causes of things, frequently pursues novelties so ardently that it

rejects the legacy of the human race. Thus it falls into very serious errors, which

are even more serious when they concern sacred authority, the interpretation of

Sacred Scripture, and the principal mysteries of Faith. The fact that many Catholic

writers also go beyond the limits determined by the Fathers and the Church

herself is extremely regrettable. In the name of higher knowledge and historical

research (they say), they are looking for that progress of dogmas which is, in

reality, nothing but the corruption of dogmas. 13

11 See Oscar Köhler, “The World Plan of Leo XIII” in History of the Church, Volume IX: The

Church in the Industrial Age, ed. Hubert Jedin and John Dolan (New York: Crossroad, New

York, 1981), 6-106.

12 The Syllabus of Errors (December 8, 1864) was a catalogue of doctrines condemned by the

Vatican. The list consists of eighty propositions declared by the Church to be erroneous. Among

them was “indifferentism,” the evil of assuming the equality and goodness of all religions, which

would be particularly relevant when addressing the Church’s reservations about the first

Parliament of Religions in 1893. See Enrique Denzinger, El Magisterio de la Iglesia (Barcelona:

Herder, 1963), 404-412.

13 Pius X, Lamentabili Sane, Syllabus Condemning the Errors of the Modernists, July 3, 1907,

Papal Encyclicals Online, accessed June 28, 2012,

http://www.papalencyclicals.net/Pius10/p10lamen.htm.

96

Thus begins the decree that lists sixty-five erroneous deviations “condemned and

proscribed” from Catholic doctrine and theology. A significant feature of this document

is that it acknowledged that the threat to the Church was not only to be found outside but

within the Church itself, particularly among Catholic intellectuals. “The fact that many

Catholic writers also go beyond the limits determined by the Fathers and the Church

herself is extremely regrettable… These errors are being daily spread among the

faithful.”

Just two months later, on September 8, 1907, Pius X made a more solemn declaration on

the subject through the promulgation of his encyclical letter Pascendi Dominici Gregis.

In this document, the Pope articulated and systematized the multifaceted phenomenon of

modern ideas as a heretical doctrine that he labeled Modernism. Similarly to Lamentabili,

the pontiff stated that the problem of erroneous modern ideas had infiltrated the Church

itself. “That We make no delay in this matter is rendered necessary especially by the fact

that the partisans of error are to be sought not only among the Church's open enemies;

they lie hid, a thing to be deeply deplored and feared, in her very bosom and heart, and

are the more mischievous, the less conspicuously they appear.”14

The encyclical states

that “every Modernist sustains and comprises within himself many personalities; he is a

philosopher, a believer, a theologian, an historian, a critic, an apologist, a reformer[,]”

and the document is structured so as to respond to each of the seven profiles.

As a general thesis, the Pope described the “evil” of Modernism as characterized by

questioning of ecclesiastical authority based on a spirit of freedom, an inclination to

change and reform for their own sake, the rejection of anything fixed or static, and an

illusory expectation of reconciling the irreconcilable as was attempted not only by the

ecumenical and interfaith movements but by the dialogue between theology and secular

ideologies, primarily atheism. The last section of the document identifies seven remedies

14 Pope Pius X, Encyclical Letter Pascendi Dominici Gregis, September 8, 1907. Official English

translation from the Vatican website, accessed June 28, 2012,

http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/pius_x/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-

x_enc_19070908_pascendi-dominici-gregis_en.html.

97

to Modernism: the study of scholastic philosophy, the Church’s own traditional form of

intellectual inquiry, against new scholarly methodologies; practical application of the

given prescriptions, particularly in seminaries, houses of formation for religious orders,

and Catholic universities; episcopal vigilance over publications, tightening up the

apostolic prerogative to read and keep forbidden books; censorship, emphasizing the

Imprimatur and Nihil Obstat rules; prohibition of priests in editor or director positions in

papers and periodicals; prohibition of congresses of priests, except on very rare

occasions, authorized by the Bishop in writing, in order to avoid “usurpation of sacred

authority”; diocesan watch committees to ensure effective purging and to report suspects;

triennial evaluations for an effective oversight and follow-up of the strategy. Needless to

say, the prohibition even of meetings of priests made the liberties taken by Catholics

during the Parliament of Religions in Chicago look like an impossible exception.

The papal concern suggested that an urgent search had to be conducted within the

Church. Modernity had disguised itself in the form of necessary dialogue with culture and

the modern age. The Church perceived this interaction as an unwanted intercourse and

not only found a name for it –Modernism- but also declared it a heresy, in fact “the

heresy of heresies” because it harbored all possible heresies in its most inclusive tenets.

This multi-headed beast the Vatican intended to fight did not appear overnight. As the

weed that comes together with the wheat in the Church’s perceptions, it grew along

inevitable historical developments. Therefore, its eradication required concrete and

decisive methods. A most visible and dramatic development in the battle against

Modernism unfolded three years later when the Pope approved the Sacrorum antistitum,

also known as the “Oath Against Modernism.” This oath became a ritual and canonical

expression of the Church’s untiring vigilance to secure orthodoxy and submission to its

teaching authority. Any member-to-be of the Catholic clergy was required to take the

oath prior to his ordination to the diaconate, the priesthood and even the episcopacy.

Faculty members at seminaries and Catholic universities were also required to take the

oath. The purpose of the oath is clearly summarized at the end of the formula:

98

I declare that I am completely opposed to the errors of the modernists…I firmly

hold, then, and shall hold to my dying breath the belief of the Fathers in the

charism of truth, which certainly is, was, and always will be in the succession of

the episcopacy from the apostles. The purpose of this is, then, not that dogma may

be tailored according to what seems better and more suited to the culture of each

age; rather, that the absolute and immutable truth preached by the apostles from

the beginning may never be believed to be different, may never be understood in

any other way. I promise that I shall keep all these articles faithfully, entirely, and

sincerely, and guard them inviolate, in no way deviating from them in teaching or

in any way in word or in writing. Thus I promise, this I swear, so help me God.15

The anti-Modernist sentiment persisted in overt or subtle ways throughout the first half of

the twentieth century. It resulted in several excommunications as any criticism of the

Church was interpreted as an act of disloyalty and unfaithfulness.16

This systematic

crusade conducted by the Church within the Church took the form of a revitalized

Inquisition that depressed but did not annihilate the ability of the Catholic Church to

come to terms with modern times. It was an institutionalization of fear through which the

ecclesiastical career and future of anyone suspected of giving way to modern thought

would be doomed.

Despite the Vatican’s formal denunciations of the dangers and threats of the modern

spirit, the Catholic Church and Christianity at large were not immune to the “virus” of

modernity. How could they be? Religion is not impermeable to the pervasive currents of

change that intersect it. As the 20th

century moved on, new modes of thinking and

analysis made inroads in the understanding of social realities, the interpretation of the

Sacred Scriptures, the forms of Christian worship, the expansion of Christianity to other

lands, the dialogue and cooperation among Christians of different denominations, and the

acknowledgement of value in non-Christian religions. Some of these ferments had

already started in the nineteenth century. Others would begin or would find expression in

15 “The Oath.”

16 The major figures included Alfred Loisy (1857-1940), George Tyrrell (1861-1909), Ernesto

Buonaiuti (1881-1946), Maude Petre (1863-1942), and Pierre Batiffol (1861-1929). See Darrell

Jodock, Catholicism contending with Modernity, Roman Catholic Modernism and Anti-

Modernism in Historical Context (Cambridge, UK; New York: Cambridge University Press,

2000).

99

the early twentieth century. They found organizational form in Catholic movements

inspired by the Social Doctrine of the Church (especially that of Leo XIII), the Biblical

Movement, the Liturgical Movement, the Missionary Movement, the Ecumenical

Movement, and the Interfaith Movement. All these ferments were very much present at

the 1893 Parliament of Religions. Most of them were also of enough concern to the

Vatican to lead some to realize that armoring the Church against modernity was no longer

a solution. The “enemy” had already penetrated the porous walls of the anti-Modernity

fortress.

The spreading industrialization of the economy continued to raise concerns about the

situation of workers under oppressive conditions. Leo XIII, the successor of Pius IX,

surprised the world in 1891 with his Encyclical Rerum Novarum, in which he denounced

the abuses inflicted on workers.17

The Pope stated that the Church could not be

indifferent to the suffering not only of its children but of all people. He adopted an

approach to social realities that served as a model for decades to come: to see, to judge

and, finally, to act. This encyclical became the foundational document of what would

become the Social Doctrine of the Catholic Church. The fortieth anniversary of Rerum

Novarum would be marked by a second social encyclical, this one by Pope Pius XI –

Quadragesimo Anno- in which the pontiff expounded the principle of subsidiarity, at that

time understood as the moral responsibility of well-off nations to lift with their

disadvantaged counterparts. In this letter, Pius XI also denounced the evils of totalitarian

regimes. The Social Doctrine would continue to evolve through the second half of the

twentieth century through the magisterium of John XXIII and his Pacem in Terris (1963)

about peace in the world and against nuclear proliferation, Paul VI and his Populorum

Progressio (1967) about development as the new name for peace, and his Octogesima

Adveniens to commemorate the eightieth anniversary of Rerum Novarum, and John Paul

II and his three social encyclicals: Laborem Exercens (1981) about the spirituality and

17 The following description of the social encyclicals will follow the Compendium of the Social

Doctrine of the Church, a document published in 2004 by the Pontifical Council for Justice and

Peace.

100

ethics of work, Solicitudo Rei Socialis (1987) to commemorate the twentieth anniversary

of Paul VI’s Populorum Progressio, and Centesimus Annus (1991) –to commemorate the

hundredth anniversary of Rerum Novarum.

The emergence of historical criticism would also put into question the historicity of the

portentous deeds and miracles attributed to God, the angels, the prophets, Jesus and the

Apostles in the Bible. The Copernican and Darwinian revolutions also raised questions

about the centrality of the earth in the biblical cosmology, the story of creation in six days

(hexameron) and the uniqueness and supremacy of man over all other creatures. The

development of literary criticism would unveil the composite character of books in the

Bible originally believed to have been penned by a single author, the editorial assembling

of separate literary traditions into a single redaction, and questions of authorship of

homogeneous documents, such as some of the letters ascribed to the Apostle Paul.18

This

obviously put into question two primary beliefs of the Church regarding the Bible: its

divine inspiration and its inerrancy. Although the Biblical movement began and gained

wide influence within Protestantism, it also made moderate inroads in Catholicism.

Several Popes issued encyclicals to safeguard the inspired and inerrant character of the

Bible while making modest room for the new developments: Leo XIII’s Providentissimus

Deus (1893), Benedict XV’s Spiritus Paraclitus (1920), and Pius XII’s Divino Afflante

Spiritus (1943).

But a new understanding of the sacred scriptures led easily to a new attitude towards the

liturgy of the Church, the context in which the Word of God was constantly proclaimed.

In response to the Protestant Reformation, the Council of Trent had fixed the canon of the

Mass and the seven sacraments in an attempt to protect the cultic tradition of the Church.

The liturgy of the Church had continued to be a priestly affair. The laity was obliged to

attend mass every Sunday and other holy days but as spectators, as passive witnesses of

the mysteries that were celebrated in Latin, a language that only the educated would

command. However, a Benedictine Abbot from the Monastery of Solesmes in France,

18 See Richard Friedman, Who wrote the Bible? (New York: HarperSanFrancisco, 1987).

101

Dom Prosper Guéranger, began the so-called Liturgical Movement, a process that started

by rescuing the medieval liturgical tradition of the Church, particularly as expressed in

Gregorian chant, but that soon reached out even earlier in history, trying to unearth the

earliest worship practices of Christianity in antiquity. Although the Church during the

reign of Pius X (1835-1914) encouraged a more active participation of the faithful in

worship through hymns and gestures, and welcomed children for the first time to receive

communion, it also felt uneasy about the innovations that were taking place in its

millenary liturgical traditions.19

The geographic explorations, conquest and colonization by the Spanish, the Portuguese,

and the French, later followed by the Belgians, of new lands and peoples gained for the

Catholic Church vast territories in the New World, Africa, South Asia and even the Far

East, with the amazing and exotic accounts of the penetration of the Jesuits Francis

Xavier in Japan and Mateo Ricci in China. For the care and oversight of missions in the

different parts of the world, in the early 17th

century the Vatican established the

Propaganda Fide, the congregation for the Propagation of the Faith. However, the

expansion of the British, Dutch, and German empires provided the opportunity for the

many branches of Protestant Christianity developing in Europe and North America to

undertake their own aggressive missionary campaigns that would catapult Protestant

Christianity onto the global scene and would grant it an ironic but highly desired

character of catholicity.20

The inroads made by the West in “the whole inhabited world”

(the meaning of the word “Ecumenism”) through colonialism would also offer the

Catholic Church the same opportunity for missionary expansion, often in competition

with Protestant outreach. To that effect, in addition to the missionary activity developed

by the traditional mendicant orders of the Middle Ages, primarily the Franciscans, the

Dominicans and the Augustinians, the missionary paradigm inaugurated by the Jesuits

19 For a critical assessment of the Liturgical Movement, see Didier Bonneterre, The Liturgical

Movement: From Dom Guéranger to Annibale Bugnini, (Kansas City, MO: Angelus Press, 2002).

20 See Kenneth Scott Latourette, A History of the Expansion of Christianity, seven volumes (New

York: Harper and Brothers Publishers, 1937-45).

102

inspired the foundation of numerous missionary congregations of priests, brothers and

sisters that would be willing to die as martyrs if necessary to gain the world for Christ in

the Catholic Church.21

It was, however, the missionary activity of Protestant Christianity that prompted the birth

of the Ecumenical Movement. It was soon evident that the dissention and competition

among denominations springing from the bosom of Protestantism could be even more

problematic than the long-standing binary opposition of Catholics and Protestants. The

fractions within Protestantism, and the mutual opposition between Protestantism and

Catholicism, came to be seen as a scandal and a contradiction in missionary lands. The

tension and sometimes animosity between competing churches, all wanting to gain new

converts for the same Christ, worked against the ideal of Christian community that

missionaries wanted to present to the inhabitants of mission lands. This problem was

addressed at the World Missionary Conference held in Edinburgh in 1910, which

gathered churches and missionary societies from most active denominations in

missionary lands. It is considered the seminal event of the modern Ecumenical

Movement. But even as the Conference sought pan-Christian cooperation, Roman

Catholics and Eastern Orthodox were not invited to participate. Based on Pope Leo’s

resolution after the Parliament of Religions in Chicago, Catholics would likely not have

attended anyway even if they had been invited.

A result of the Conference was the establishment of the International Missionary Council.

Two other ecumenical initiatives for doctrinal dialogue (Faith and Order) and for pastoral

cooperation (Life and Work) would eventually merge and would be followed by the

International Missionary Council into what became the World Council of Churches, the

21 For the later development of missiology, see Rodger C. Bassham, Mission theology, 1948-

1975: years of worldwide creative tension--ecumenical, evangelical, and Roman Catholic

(Pasadena, Ca: William Carey Library, c1979).

103

largest ecumenical body today, of which the Catholic Church is a committed observer

rather than a member.22

The contact of Christendom with other latitudes through trade and colonialism raised

awareness of other religions. International expositions of industrial commerce and

communication soon opened the door to global exchange in other realms of society and

culture. This was the case when the Chicago Columbian Exposition planning committee

announced its intention to establish the World’s Congress Auxiliary and, through it,

convene the first Parliament of Religions. This Congress has been widely acknowledged

as the foundational event of the modern interfaith movement. It would be followed by

other global interfaith initiatives, such as the International Association for Religious

Freedom, the World Congress of Faiths, and the World Conference on Religion and

Peace.23

Even as the Church was struggling externally and internally against modernity and

Modernism respectively, modernity itself was facing its own potentials for creativity,

invention and progress as well as for conflict, destruction and annihilation: a paradox of

promise and failure. In the short span of a few decades, the world had changed

dramatically. On the one hand, modernity brought the impressive advantages of

technology. The telephone and the telegraph would pave the way for what would

eventually become a web of global telecommunications. Motorization also changed the

landscapes of cities and countries through cars and trains. Air transportation would also

bring nations and continents together at a speed never imagined before. This also

facilitated international circulation of knowledge and information. Urbanization was also

overcoming millennia-old rural lifestyles, and major cities were becoming ethnically,

linguistically and culturally diverse through global migrations.

22 Ruth Rouse, editor, A History of the Ecumenical Movement (Geneva: World Council of

Churches, 1986).

23 See Marcus Braybrooke, Pilgrimage of Hope: One Hundred Years of Global Inter-Faith

Dialogue (London: SCM Press Ltd, 1992).

104

On the other hand, modernity also generated great concerns. The breach between the rich

and the poor became ever wider. The demographic explosion also contributed to a state

of hopelessness about the ability of the poorer nations to ever overcome poverty and to

provide for the education of their populations so that they could enter the emerging world

economy. Nationalism increased rivalry between competing powers. Colonialism

disrupted the local ethos and the overall rhythm of entire continents. Technology

developed sophisticated weapons of individual, group and mass destruction. Wars of a

global scale demonstrated how wrong things can go in the handling of national interests

and international alliances. The Holocaust, arguably the most horrifying episode of

human degradation and terror, showcased the use of up-to-date technologies and

organizational methods for truly horrible ends. Despite its promise of unstoppable

progress, the modernity project left the world disoriented, in desolation, and at the mercy

of mighty contenders with the potential of further and graver destruction that would

convert the planet into a minefield for more than four decades during the Cold War.24

This perplexity generated a craving for transformation that materialized in a number of

events in the 1960s, a decade that historian Harold Troper remembers as pivotal:

Popular memory recalls the 1960s as a permissive decade, the ‘swinging sixties,’

a time of youthful exuberance, political upheaval, and recreational drug use. Hair

was long; skirts were short. The pill hit the market in 1960, pantyhose in 1965.

Bullets snuffed out the life of an American president, a presidential candidate, and

a Black leader with a dream of racial harmony. An American astronaut walked on

the moon and the acrid smell of smoke hung over riot-scarred Detroit, New York,

and Los Angeles. There was the Chicago Democratic Convention, Woodstock,

the Prague Spring, the Bay of Pigs, the Second Vatican Council, the War on

Poverty, the Tonkin Resolution, the Tet offensive, and Hair.25

Sharing the front page with the pill and pantyhose, the Second Vatican Council made

headlines during the first half of the “permissive decade,” showing that the Catholic

24 See Richard Overy, Hammond Atlas of the 20

th Century (London: Times Books, 1999).

25 Harold Troper, The Defining Decade. Identity, Politics, and the Canadian Jewish Community

in the 1960s (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2010), 3.

105

Church not only was listening to the symphony of change around it, but was finally

willing to take part.

The Second Vatican Council: the Catholic Church embracing

modernity

Like the captain of a ship struggling not to drown in the stormy see of modernity, the

Vatican led the Church through the first decades of the twentieth century. However, as

time passed, the Vatican began to feel less reluctant to navigate the currents of modern

times while still steering clear of shores it did not want to approach. But the world was

changing so much that, sooner than later, the Vatican would have to come to terms with

it.

Outside the walls of the Vatican, at the grassroots level and in some of the learned circles

within Catholicism, many believers were beginning to hold in high esteem some of

changes and movements that had emerged in the 19th

or 20th

centuries. In addition to the

social, biblical, liturgical, missionary, ecumenical, and interfaith movements, there were

new avenues of theological reflection, among them La Nouvelle Theologie, seen by its

critics as the embodiment of Modernism in disguise. 26

A new openness among

theologians combined with a significant awakening in the laity through the establishment

of an official lay organization called Catholic Action (1905). This lay association fostered

the formation of an institutionally active laity, defined in this context as co-operation in

the apostolic activity of the Church, particularly in secular settings where lay Catholics

were active as workers or professionals, and to which the clergy had limited access.27

Along Catholic Action, other movements sprang in the Church, such as the Young

Christian Workers, founded by Belgian Cardinal Joseph Cardijn, the Young Christian

26 On la Nouvelle Theologie, see Jürgen Mettepenningen, Nouvelle théologie - new theology:

inheritor of Modernism, precursor of Vatican II (London: T & T Clark, 2010). 27

See Ernesto Preziosi , editor, Storia dell'Azione cattolica: la presenza nella Chiesa e nella

societ· italiana (Soveria Mannelli : Rubbettino, c2008).

106

Students and the Christian Family Movement.28

Other strong and global Catholic lay

organizations that continue to be very active today appeared at the grassroots level,

slowly paving the way to a more protagonistic role for the laity in the Church. These

movements included Opus Dei (1928), the Focolare Movement (1943), Communion and

Liberation (1954), and the Neocathecumenical Way (1964).29

This increasingly

empowered laity added to the ferment that culminated in so transforming an event as the

Second Vatican Council. However, the Vatican had felt safer within the fortress it had

built for itself and behind the garrisons it established across the globe, holding fast to a

monarchic structure and style. It would take an independent-minded Pope to push the

gates of the fortress and “let the fresh air come in.”30

That Pope was John XXIII (1881-

1963).

The good Pope and Vatican II

Eugenio Roncalli was out of the fortress and exposed to the world in a unique way while

serving the Church as a diplomat in such critical places as Bulgaria, Turkey and Greece,

and France. In Bulgaria he came into close contact with Orthodox Christianity (1925-

28 Marguerite Fièvez, Jacques Meert, prèface de Helder Camara, Cardijn (Bruxelles: E.V.O.

[Èditions "Vie ouvrière"], 1969).

29 On the lay movements, see Alberto Melloni, editor, ‘Movements’ in the church (London: SCM

Press, c2003). For a critical assessment combined with a personal perspective, see Gordon

Unquhart, The Pope’s Armada (London, Toronto: Bantam Press, 1995).

30 This phrase has become iconic to describe the pontiff’s convocation of the Second Vatican

Council. “The story is told that on one occasion when the pope was meeting with some journalists

in the Vatican and they asked the pope what the purpose of the council was, he went over to a

window, opened it, and said, ‘We are going to let some fresh air into the Church.’” Quoted from

Curtis A. Jahn, “A Look at Three of the Most Significant Religious Events in the 20th Century—

The Second Vatican Council: Change and Continuity in the Catholic Synthesis,” paper presented

at the Metro North, Metro South, Urban Joint Conference ,September 28-29, 1999, p. 2,

Wisconsin Lutheran Seminary Library, accessed June 28, 2012,

www.wlsessays.net/files/JahnVatican.rtf. In note no. 4, the author states that the story was told

by Hans Küng in a televised interview that was included in the video series The Faithful

Revolution, Vatican II (Vatican II Productions, Lyrick Studios, 1997). For a citation of the phrase

in a non-Christian context, see James W. Heisig, “The Dialogue among religions, looking back,

looking ahead,” Nanzan Bulletin, 17 (1993): 42, accessed June 28, 2012, http://nirc.nanzan-

u.ac.jp/publications/Bulletin_and_Shoho/pdf/17-Heisig.pdf.

107

1935). Turkey allowed him not only to further his interaction with Orthodox Christianity

but also to learn about Islam. In Turkey (1935-1944), he was witness to the abolition of

the Sultanate after the dissolution of the Ottoman Empire and the transformative impact

of Mustafa Kemal Ataturk. France, the home of powerful challenges to Rome from

Lyons through Avignon to Gallicanism, gave him experience with a secular democratic

power in a non-Italian context (1944-1953). As a Cardinal and the Patriarch of Venice,

Roncalli arrived in Rome in 1958 with a return ticket in hand expecting to head back to

Venice after the conclave that would elect the successor of the late Pius XII. In a

polarized papal election in which neither of the two candidates was able to number the

two-thirds majority necessary for election, Cardinal Roncalli was proposed as a

compromise candidate. To the surprise of many Cardinals, Roncalli was elected.31

Given his advanced age, Roncalli was widely regarded as a compromise to unlock the

conclave, and, as such, a transitional Pope. It was expected he would occupy the papal

office as a guardian of the status quo. No one imagined that this unexpected Pope would

initiate the most dramatic change that the Catholic Church had experienced in centuries:

reconciliation with its most challenging archenemy –Modernity. Just three months after

his election, on January 25, 1959, the feast day that commemorates the Conversion of St.

Paul, and from the Basilica of the same Apostle outside the walls of Rome, John XXIII

surprised the Church and the world by announcing the convocation of the Second Vatican

Council.

John XXIII inaugurated the Council but died eight months after its opening. His death

was a cause of grief not only for Catholics and other Christians, but for concerned people

around the world.

31 See Fr. Lawrence F. Murphy’s version of the conclave in “The Unlikely Election of John

XXIII,” http://www.catholicireland.net/church-a-bible/church/history/108-the-unlikely-election-

of-john-xxiii, accessed June 30, 2012. Peter Hebblethwaite’s version states Roncalli did not

receive the two thirds plus one he needed until the eleventh ballot. See Peter Hebblethwaite, John

XXIII, Pope of the Century (New York: Continuum, 2000), 141.

108

The Council was continued by his successor, Pope Paul VI (1897-1978). Paul not only

brought it to successful completion, but he set about with seriousness the task of

implementing the Council’s decrees during the remaining thirteen years of his

pontificate.32

Appraised as a new Pentecost, an image that had often been used in referring to the

Parliament of Religions in Chicago seventy years earlier, the theme of the Second

Vatican Council was expressed in the Italian word aggiornamento, that is the updating or

adapting of the Church to new times.33

The gathering addressed all aspects of Church

life. It left a legacy of four constitutions, nine decrees and three declarations, which are

outlined below: 34

The dogmatic constitution on the Church, Lumen Gentium, focused on the Church as the

People of God, a significant shift in language from the hierarchy-centered discourse that

had prevailed for centuries in official church teaching. While there was no shift away

from the hierarchical structure of the Church, Vatican II proclaimed the centrality of the

body of the baptized—described in Lumen Gentium (following the language of the

epistles of the New Testament, especially I Peter 2: 9-10) as a royal, prophetic and

priestly people. The clergy are called to serve this people with the unique and necessary

functions with which the ministers of the Church have been invested.35

The dogmatic constitution on Revelation, Dei Verbum, recognized the centrality of the

Bible in Catholic life and doctrine and encouraged the familiarity of all the faithful with

32 See Peter Hebblethwaite, Paul VI: the first modern Pope (London: HarperCollins, 1993).

33 For a comprehensive treatment of the Council process in one volume, see John W. O’Malley,

What Happened at Vatican II (Cambridge, Mass: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press,

2008).

34 Austin Flannery, editor, Vatican Council II: The Conciliar and Post-Conciliar Documents

(Dublin: Dominican Publications.1988).

35 For a treatment of the Church from a historical and theological perspective and with a focus on

Vatican II, its continuities and discontinuities, see Richard McBrien, The Church: the evolution of

Catholicism (New York, NY: HarperOne, 2008).

109

the sacred book. In some previous generations, private reading of the Scriptures by lay

people in their own languages had been associated with the risk of deviant interpretations

(and, of course, with Protestantism.) In the Second Vatican Council, access to Scripture

for everyone, in vernacular languages, was strongly encouraged.36

The dogmatic constitution on the liturgy, Sacrosanctum Concilium, welcomed the reform

of the liturgical calendar, highlighting the centrality of Christ and eliminating feasts of

saints whose historicity had been put into question by historical criticism. In an effort to

engage the laity, it also approved the celebration of the mass in vernacular languages. As

an important inter-faith gesture, it also led to a striking change in the Good Friday ritual,

editing out a harshly worded prayer for the conversion “of the perfidious Jews” and

replacing it with language that refers to the Jewish people as “the first to hear the Word

of God,” and prays “that they may continue to grow in the love of God’s name and in

faithfulness to his covenant.” 37

The decree on the bishops, Christus Dominus, affirmed the collegiality of all bishops,

working in cooperation with the Pope in the leadership of the universal Church.

Similarly, the decree on the priests, Presbyterorum Ordinis, aimed at an integration of the

life and ministry of priests, emphasizing the priesthood as a vocation and lifestyle and not

simply a profession or occupation. The decree on formation for the priesthood, Optatam

Totius, proposed a holistic program of clerical education addressing spiritual,

psychological, academic, disciplinary and pastoral aspects. The academic aspects would

require not only sound theological education, but the prerequisite of humanistic and

philosophical formation.38

36 See Christoph Theobald, Dans les traces-- de la constitution "Dei verbum" du concile Vatican

II: bible, théologie et pratiques de lecture (Paris: Editions du Cerf, 2009).

37 See Piero Marini, Serving the people of God: remembering Sacrosanctum Concilium (Ottawa:

Novalis, 2006).

38 See Richard R. Gaillardetz, The church in the making: Lumen Gentium, Christus Dominus,

Orientalium Ecclesiarum (New York: Paulist Press, c2006); Maryanne Confoy, Religious life and

priesthood: Perfectae caritatis, Optatam totius, Presbyterorum ordinis (Mahwah, NJ; New York:

Paulist Press, c2008).

110

The decree on the religious, Perfectae Caritatis, recognized the gift that men and women

members of religious orders represent for the Church and for the world and encouraged

the orders to refresh their communal life and work by reflectively returning to their

origins, to the spirituality and apostolic intuition of the founders and foundresses of their

institutes.39

The decree on the laity, Apostolicam Actuositatem, officially confirmed, endorsed and

encouraged the right and duty of the laity to participate in the apostolic activity of the

Church.40

The decree on the Oriental Churches, Orientalium Ecclesiarum, respectfully

acknowledged as a valuable Christian heritage the ritual, historical and cultural diversity

of the non-Latin Churches in full communion with the Church of Rome.41

The decree on Missions, Ad Gentes Divinitus, reaffirmed the mandate of the Church to

spread the message of the Gospel to all peoples but condemned coercive conversions and

called for respect for the cultures and religions of the receiving peoples.42

The decree on Ecumenism, Unitatis Redintegratio, opened the door to a dialogue towards

unity and concrete cooperation with other Christians.43

39 On the great impact the Council had on women religious, see Joan Chittister, The way we were:

a story of conversion and renewal (Maryknoll, N.Y.: Orbis Books, 2005).

40 See Dolores R. Leckey, The laity and Christian education: apostolicam actuositatem,

gravissimum educationis (New York: Paulist Press, 2006).

41 See John Madey, Orientalium ecclesiarum, more than twenty years after: a new commentary

on Vatican II's decree on the oriental Catholic Churches (Kottayam, Kerala, India : Pontifical

Oriental Institute of Religious Studies, 1987). For a more recent treatment of the document in

relation to other documents, see Richard R. Gaillardetz, The church in the making: Lumen

Gentium, Christus Dominus, Orientalium Ecclesiarum (New York: Paulist Press, 2006)

42 See William Frazier, "A monumental breakthrough in the Missiology of Vatican II and its

reception by ongoing leadership in the church." International Bulletin of Missionary Research

34.3 (2010): 139+, GALE|A231505214.

43 See Edward Idris Cassidy, Ecumenism and interreligious dialogue: Unitatis redintegratio,

Nostra aetate (New York: Paulist Press, 2005).

111

The decree on the Mass Media, Inter Mirifica, highlighted the strategic importance of

modern means of communication technology for the apostolic activity of the Church.44

The declaration on Religious Freedom, Dignitatis Humanae, was a controversial

document and perhaps one of the most sensitive in relation to the anti-modernist

reservations the Church had held for a long time. The document that won the approval of

the majority of the Council Fathers insisted on freedom of conscience and freedom of

religion. Its opponents felt inclined to a decree on religious tolerance instead.45

The declaration on the Christian Education of Youth, Gravissimum Educationis,

emphasized one of the most important and influential ministries of the Catholic Church

worldwide, affirming the universal right to education and the rights of Catholics to a

Catholic education.46

All the documents of the Second Vatican Council had important though often different

degrees of impact in the realms that they addressed. However, for the purposes of this

discussion, there are two documents that constitute milestones for the Church’s

relationship to modernity and, in particular, to other religions. They are the pastoral

constitution Gaudium et Spes and the declaration Nostra Aetate.

Gaudium et Spes (Joy and Hope) addresses the position of the Church in the current

world. This document might be considered the Magna Carta of the Church’s embrace of

modernity. It acknowledges the natural interaction between religion and culture and their

influence on each other. It addresses topics such as the dignity of the human person,

44 See Norman Tanner, The church and the world: Gaudium et spes, Inter mirifica (New York:

Paulist Press, 2005).

45 See Stephen B. Bevans, SVD and Jeffrey Gros, FSC, Evangelization and religious freedom :

Ad gentes, Dignitatis humanae (New York ; Mahwah, NJ: Paulist Press, 2009). See also

Herminio Rico, John Paul II and the legacy of Dignitatis humanae (Washington, D.C.:

Georgetown University Press, 2002).

46 See Dolores R. Leckey, The laity and Christian education: apostolicam actuositatem,

gravissimum educationis (New York: Paulist Press, 2006).

112

economic development, the political community, and the promotion of peace. It also

encourages dialogue between the Church and the modern sciences. In sharp contrast to

the statements made by opponents of the plan for a Parliament of Religions in Paris that

the Catholic Church alone possesses the truth and has nothing else to learn,47

Gaudium et

Spes solemnly affirms that the Church has not only given but received from the

development of the human race throughout history:

Just as it is in the world's interest to acknowledge the Church as an historical

reality, and to recognize her good influence, so the Church herself knows how

richly she has profited by the history and development of humanity.

The experience of past ages, the progress of the sciences, and the treasures hidden

in the various forms of human culture, by all of which the nature of man himself

is more clearly revealed and new roads to truth are opened, these profit the

Church, too. For, from the beginning of her history she has learned to express the

message of Christ with the help of the ideas and terminology of various

philosophers, and has tried to clarify it with their wisdom, too. Her purpose has

been to adapt the Gospel to the grasp of all as well as to the needs of the learned,

insofar as such was appropriate. Indeed this accommodated preaching of the

revealed word ought to remain the law of all evangelization. For thus the ability to

express Christ's message in its own way is developed in each nation, and at the

same time there is fostered a living exchange between the Church and the diverse

cultures of people. To promote such exchange, especially in our days, the Church

requires the special help of those who live in the world, are versed in different

institutions and specialties, and grasp their innermost significance in the eyes of

both believers and unbelievers. With the help of the Holy Spirit, it is the task of

the entire People of God, especially pastors and theologians, to hear, distinguish

and interpret the many voices of our age, and to judge them in the light of the

divine word, so that revealed truth can always be more deeply penetrated, better

understood and set forth to greater advantage”. 48

47 See remarks by Abbé Moreau quoted by James H. Moynihan, The Life of Archbishop John

Ireland, (New York: Harper and Brothers Publishers, 1953) 44, note 21, La Revue Blue, Paris,

November 16, 1895.

48 Pastoral Constitution about the Church in the modern world, Gaudium et Spes, 44. Official

English translation from the Vatican website, www.vatican.va.

113

While the Church retains its claim to be the true faith received by divine revelation, this

change of attitude towards reconciliation, dialogue and even friendliness towards “the

world” truly constitutes a historic milestone in the Church’s relationship to modernity.49

The commitment to the dialogue between faith and culture as well as the emphasis on the

Church as the People of God and on the collegiality of the bishops for its universal

governance, amply portrayed in content and process in the Second Vatican Council, stand

in sharp contrast to the rejection of modern culture and the exaltation of the Supreme

Pontiff presented by the First Vatican Council. As there were dissenters in Vatican I, who

disapproved of the pontifical infallibility and formed new branches of the Old Catholic

Church, a similar –but reversed- process took place in Vatican II. Traditionalists

interpreted the Council’s acceptance of a new vision as a blasphemous infiltration of

modernism into the papacy and the Church at large. They rejected the reforms enacted by

the Council. French Archbishop Marcel-Francois Lefebvre, for example, would establish

the Society of St. Pius X, a schismatic organization, also known as the Lefebvrian

Movement.50

Interestingly, the dissent around infallibility did not vanish one hundred

years after its dogmatic definition in Vatican I. German theologian Hans Küng was

outspoken in opposition to the notion of papal infallibility. As a result, together with

other doctrinal concerns of the Vatican about Küng’s writings, his teaching appointment

at the Catholic Faculty of the University of Tübingen was withdrawn. 51

However, his

priestly faculties remain intact and he will emerge a key player in the Centennial

Parliament of Religions drafting the Declaration Towards a Global Ethic.

The Second Vatican Council has been considered a modern equivalent to the Copernican

Revolution. Others, judging its aftermath, have interpreted it more as a restoration than as

49 See Rafael González Moralejo, El Vaticano II en taquigrafía: la historia de la "Gaudium et

spes" (Madrid: Biblioteca de Autores Cristianos, 2000).

50 See Patrick Madrid, More Catholic than the Pope (Huntington, Ind.: Our Sunday Visitor,

2004).

51 Hans Küng, Infallible? An Inquiry (Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1983).

114

a renewal.52

There is no doubt that both continuities and discontinuities are actively at

work in Vatican II. While the central tenets of Christian doctrine and Catholic tradition

were reaffirmed, the official openness to and engagement with modernity certainly

represented a clear departure from the Church’s position, particularly from the beginning

of the twentieth century. But Vatican II also represents the dawn of the official

engagement of the Vatican with other religions in a non-adversarial framework. The key

interfaith statement of the Second Vatican Council, Nostra Aetate, addressed the relation

of the Church with non-Christian Religions. It was certainly in the spirit of this document

that the Catholic Church became part of the Centennial Parliament of Religions in 1993.

The Catholic Church and other religions

For many a surprise outcome of the Second Vatican Council was the Church’s response

to religious diversity and pluralism. The attitude of the Catholic Church towards other

religions has been marked by a paradox. On the one hand, the Church sees itself as God’s

chosen depository of the message of salvation to be proclaimed throughout the earth. It

believes that its mission includes a divine mandate to baptize all willing human beings in

the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, thereby incorporating them

into the community of salvation. Therefore, any non-Christian human being constitutes a

missionary target since the Church perceives it both a duty and a right to bring the

message of salvation in Jesus Christ to those outside the Church. On the other hand, as

part of its aggiornamento, that is updating to modernity, the Church officially

acknowledged the truth and goodness present in other religions by rescuing from oblivion

52 Hans Küng, The Catholic Church, A Short History, (New York: Modern Libraries Chronicle,

2001), 187.

115

references to the subject in early Patristic literature53

and looking back to an interaction

with other faiths as long as its own history.54

From its very origins and throughout its development, Christianity has been related to

other religions. It was born in the bosom of the religion of Israel and was tutored by the

philosophical religious currents of Greco-Roman culture. It found in Islam its most

threatening contender and in its missionary incursions it subdued the native religions of

the New World and faced the untamable faiths of the East.

Christianity was an offspring of the Jewish religion. Christianity remembers that Jesus

was born a Jew and was raised according to Jewish law. He was circumcised and

presented to God in the Temple at Jerusalem eight and forty days respectively after his

birth. He complied with the ritual visits to the Temple as did his parents, and read from

the Torah scrolls. His closest disciples and collaborators were all Jewish. Their Jewish

identity did not seem unaltered after Jesus’ death, since they expected new recruits to the

Jesus movement to follow Jewish law as they did, including circumcision and dietary

restrictions. But the religion of Israel was not a monolith. It was internally divided. There

were Pharisees and Sadducees along with the politically motivated Zealots and the

monastically organized Essenes. The movement of the followers of the Nazarene might

have been just another scion of the Judaic tree.55

53 Saint Justin, the apologist, wrote of the “semina verbi” (seeds of the Word) in his Second

Apology. See André Wartelle, editor, Apologies, Saint Justine: introduction, text critique,

translation, commentary and index. Apologiae. French & Greek. 1987. (Paris: Études

augustiniennes, 1987).

54 The following paragraphs are the writer’s own recollections, summary and assessment of

events and people commonly known in the history of Catholic inter-faith relations. General

references are offered for a detailed exploration of the various topics. An interesting overview of

the subject is offered by Julien Ries, Les chrétiens parmi les religions. Des Actes des Apotres a

Vatican II, (Paris: Desclée, 1987). 55

For an emphasized version of this perspective, see John Fieldsend et al., Roots and branches:

explorations into the Jewish context of the Christian faith (Bedford: PWM Trust and The Centre

for Biblical and Hebraic Studies, 1998). Fieldsend is a Messianic Jew and an Anglican priest.

116

However, it was precisely a passionate Jew—one who was originally opposed to the

followers of Jesus--who would make decisive moves to differentiate Christianity from the

religion of Israel. Saul of Tarsus, renamed Paul after he joined the followers of Jesus, saw

as his task and mission the spread of the message of Christianity beyond the community

of Israel. His mission strategy included a decision to invite the Gentiles to join the new

community without having to comply with the specific rituals and demands of Jewish

law, including circumcision, a clear breach between the new faith and its parent tradition.

In this move the followers of Jesus took themselves out of the community of Israel. In

addition to being a tireless missionary and founder of Churches throughout the

Mediterranean basin, Paul also became the first theologian and documenter of the new

faith, a faith he preached as an ecumenical and unifying path: “there is no distinction

between Jew and Greek.”56

The planting of Christian communities in Greco-Roman soil made unavoidable the

infiltration of Hellenistic ideas and practices into the very formation and constitution of

Christianity. The Pauline corpus of epistles arguably reveals the influence of Stoic ideas

in the early Christian discourse as well as a dualistic dichotomy between the soul and the

flesh: “who will rescue me from this body of death?”57

The Gospel according to John

differs significantly from its synoptic counterparts for its strong Platonic tones. In its

famous prologue, the author portrays Jesus as the logos, which was eternally with God

prior to becoming flesh and dwelling among humanity.58

When the new faith entered into

contention with Greco-Roman philosophers, learned converts from the same milieu –later

known as the Apologists, Justin among them- defended Christianity from the attack of its

critics by beginning to accommodate its message within Hellenistic categories. The first

Christian thinkers were trying to make sense of the gospel within a Greco-Roman

framework. Gnosticism soon made inroads into the new faith while doctrinal disputes

56 Romans 10:12.

57 Romans 7:24.

58 John 1:1-18.

117

about the divinity and humanity of Jesus spread, causing divisions and schisms. The

doctrinal definitions articulated in the first ecumenical councils clearly reflect the official

adoption of Hellenistic concepts in the shaping of Christian orthodoxy.59

The adoption of Christianity as the official religion of the Empire meant its definite

triumph over paganism, which would be slowly and lawfully crushed and extirpated. The

smashing of the idols perpetrated by St. Martin of Tours in Gaul constitutes a vivid

example of the transformation of a suffering and persecuted community into a judge and

persecutor of the “heathen”.60

Soon Christians would trade the darkness of the catacombs

for the splendor of the Roman basilicas. The magnificent Pantheon, now the Church of

Our Lady of the Martyrs in Rome, still stands as a testimony of the conversion to

Christianity of pagan architecture. The altars and incense once used to make sacrifices to

the gods now became locations and instruments of Christian worship. Pagan feasts were

soon Christianized.61

It has also been strongly suggested that St. Augustine’s intercourse

with Manichaeism –a religion of Persian origin- prior to his conversion to Christianity,

left an indelible imprint on him, despite his formal rejection of it. This influence was

reflected in the works of this theological giant and specifically in his proclivity to

interpret human sexuality in negative terms.62

Furthermore, there is another hypothesis

claiming that the extreme practices of early Christian asceticism as well as the

development of Christian monasticism in the desert were the result of a blending of

Christian faith and Eastern practices then widespread in the Roman Empire, since Jesus

59 See Tuomas Rasimus, Troels Engberg-Pedersen and Ismo Dunderberg, editors, Stoicism in

Early Christianity (Grand Rapids, MI: BakerAcademic, 2010). For an argument downplaying

such influence, see Ronald H. Nash, Christianity and the Hellenistic world (Grand Rapids, Mich.:

Zondervan; Dallas, Tex.: Probe Ministries Internacional, 1984).

60 See chapter XIV of Sulpitius Severus’ classical biography of St. Martin of Tours, Sulpice

Sévère, Vie de Saint Martin, trans. Jacques Fontaine (Paris: Éditions du Cerf, 1967-69).

61 See Philippe Walter, Christianity: the origins of a pagan religion, trans. Jon E. Graham

(Rochester, Vt.: Inner Traditions, 2006).

62 For Saint Augustine and sexuality, see Alan G. Soble, “Correcting Some Misconceptions about

Saint Augustine’s Sex Life,” Journal of the History of Sexuality, 11, 4 (2002): 545-569.

118

and his disciples were neither hermits nor monks and withdrawal from society was

frowned upon by mainstream Judaism.63

As Christianity spread it encountered other religions beyond the confines of the

Mediterranean world. An ancient tradition states that Christianity reached India for the

first time through the alleged missionary activity of St. Thomas, one of the twelve

apostles of Jesus. For centuries, the so-called St. Thomas Christians in South India have

preserved their Christian faith in the midst of a religiously diverse South Asian

landscape.64

Another significant example is Nestorian Christianity. Condemned by the

Council of Ephesus in 431, Nestorians did not comply with the orthodoxy imposed on

them and continued to develop as a parallel community, spreading into the heartland of

Central Asia and eventually reaching the millenary Chinese capital of Chang’an, also

known as Xi’an. In the Forest of Steleae, an impressive museum of stones in that city,

there is an ancient tablet with a Nestorian inscription. There, this form of Christianity

certainly encountered Taoism, Confucianism and Buddhism.65

But the most dramatic encounter of Christianity with another religion came with the

emergence of Islam. This faith –which claims to be the rightful heir to its Abrahamic

predecessors- soon went beyond its cradle in the Arabian Peninsula. In short order it

spread and conquered vast territories around the Mediterranean basin and beyond. This

expansive Muslim enterprise crushed Christian prominence in cherished historical centers

such as Damascus (635), Antioch (636), Jerusalem (638), Caesarea (640), Alexandria

(642) and Carthage (697). The seemingly unstoppable armies of Islam continued to

spread further east and west, conquering Afghanistan (699) -and from there moving into

63 See Jesús Alvarez Gómez, Historia de la Vida Religiosa, Volumen I, Desde los orígenes hasta

la reforma cluniacense (Madrid: Instituto Teológico de Vida Religiosa, 1987). See also Juan

María Laboa, editor, The Historical Atlas of Eastern and Western Christian Monasticism

(Collegeville, Minn.: The Liturgical Press, 2001).

64 See Leonard Fernando and G. Gispert-Sauch, Christianity in India: two thousand years of faith

(New Delhi: Viking, 2004).

65 See Richard C. Foltz, Religions of the Silk Road, Overland Trade and Cultural Exchange from

Antiquity to the Fifteenth Century (New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1999).

119

South and South East Asia—and Spain (715). Islam’s penetration into the heart of Europe

was stopped by Charles Martel in Tours (732). But Islam’s challenge to Christianity

continued. Furthermore, Islam was not only a military threat. It was an enlightened

civilization in which the cultivation of the sciences and the arts reached levels of

sophistication Europe did not know.66

The most articulate and controversial response of Christianity to the threat of Islam was

the launching of the Crusades in the hope of re-conquering the sites in the Holy Land lost

to the Muslims. However, despite some temporary military successes, this costly and

painful enterprise proved to be devastating for Eastern Christendom and did not remove

Islam from its conquered territories. On the contrary, Constantinople fell to the power of

Islam in 1453.67

Despite the successful expulsion of Islam from the south of the Iberian

peninsula, orchestrated by the Castilian monarchs, Islam continued to represent a threat to

Europe. A telling reflection on the struggle between Christianity and Islam is found in the

conversion of Hagia Sophia of Constantinople, the most important basilica in Byzantine

Christianity, into a mosque, and in the conversion of the impressive mosque of Cordova,

Spain, into a Catholic Cathedral.68

The European colonial explorations of the fifteenth and sixteenth century opened a wide

door for the encounter of Christianity with other religions and eventually the spread of

the Christian faith to all the regions of the earth. The mendicant orders of the Middle

Ages, which addressed the needs of new urban societies that could not be met by the

traditional and more rural-oriented monastic orders, adapted themselves to the new

challenges and accompanied the explorers in their overseas enterprises. Spanish and

66 A helpful chronology is found in Karen Armstrong, Islam (New York: Chronicles Book, 2000).

67 See S. J. Allen and Emilie Ant, The Crusades: a reader (Peterborough, Ontario: Broadview

Press, 2003) and Thomas F. Madden, Crusades: the illustrated history (Ann Harbor: University

of Michigan Press, 2004).

68 See Robert S. Nelson, Hagia Sophia, 1850-1950: holy wisdom modern monument (Chicago:

University of Chicago Press, 2004). See also Helaine Silverman, editor, Contested cultural

heritage: religion, nationalism, erasure, and exclusion in a global world (New York; London:

Springer, 2011).

120

Portuguese conquistadores and missionaries dismissed the religious practices of the

indigenous groups of the Americas as demonic and superstitious and undertook to

eradicate them and Christianize the native populations. Archaeological excavations in

Tenochtitlan (Mexico), Cuzco (Peru), and elsewhere in the New World reveal that

Christian churches were literally built atop the destroyed temples of the aboriginal

religions, continuing the practice of early Christianity of which the Church of Santa

Maria Sopra Minerva in Rome is an example. Portuguese incursions down the west coast

of Africa and into South and East Asia brought contact with the religions of these

places.69

The missionary activity of the Jesuit saint Francis Xavier has become legendary. He

baptized hundreds in India, established Christianity in Japan, and died a few miles from

the coast of China, his most cherished but un-reached destination. His remains are

currently venerated in Old Goa, a former Portuguese colonial enclave in southern India.70

Two other Jesuit missionaries stand out for the strong attraction they felt to the millenary

cultures of India and China and their creative attempts to adapt and express the message

of Christianity in those ancient cultural centers, reaching back a thousand years to the

example of the Church’s incorporation of aspects of Greco-Roman Culture. In India

Jesuit Robert de Nobili attempted to inculturate Christianity into the powerful Brahmin

caste.71

Even more creative was the work of the Jesuit Matteo Ricci. He mastered

Mandarin, and, with intelligence and audacity, gained the trust of the Chinese emperor

69 See Linda Gregerson and Susan Juster, editors, Empires of God: religious encounters in the

early modern Atlantic (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2011). For the conversion

of pagan temples into Christian venues in early Christianity, see Johannes Hahn, Stephen Emmel

& Ulrich Gotter, editors, From temple to church: destruction and renewal of local cultic

topography in late antiquity (Leiden; Boston: Brill, 2008).

70 See Ignacio Arellano and Delio Mendonça, editors, Misión y aventura: San Francisco Javier,

sol en Oriente (Madrid: Iberoamericana; Frankfurt am Main: Vervuert, 2008).

71 For a specific treatment of Nobili, see Joe Arun, editor, Interculturation of Religion: Critical

Perspectives on Robert de Nobili’s Mission in India (Bangalore: Asian Trading Corp, 2007).

121

who granted him permission to establish Catholic Christianity in China.72

Ricci faced a

controversy related to the rituals that Chinese converts to Christianity still had to observe

in regards to the Chinese Emperor. Rome became uncomfortable with what it regarded as

pagan practices, declaring them idolatrous. In this case, Rome seemed to have forgotten

how Christianity survived and expanded thanks to its ability to adapt itself to the

conditions of Greco-Roman culture. Some global enthusiasts of Christian missions regret

that this move from Rome denied the Church what might otherwise have been a

blossoming of Christianity in Asian lands.73

Subsequent French, Belgian, Dutch, and

British imperial expansion boosted missionary activity within their respective imperial

domains. But this time it was not only Catholic but also Protestant missionary activity

that expanded.74

The encounter of Christianity, Catholic and Protestant, with non-Christian religions was

not limited to interaction with its sister Abrahamic religions around the Mediterranean

basin nor to the colonizing and missionary incursions of the West in other parts of the

world. The phenomenon of global migrations also brought eastern religions to the West.

The bustling metropolis of Europe and North America are today ripe with religions that

reflect a new urban pluri-ethnic and multi-cultural landscape. It is no longer only the

traditional missionary religions (Buddhism, Christianity and Islam) that are global. Ethnic

and national religions have also reached a global scope while new religious movements

have also appeared on the global scene.75

Both the millenary history of the interaction

between Christianity and other religions and the expansive marketplace of religious

72 For a specific treatment of Ricci, see John Young, East-West Synthesis: Matteo Ricci and

Confucianism (Hong Kong: Centre of Asian Studies, 1980).

73 For a specific treatment of the Chinese rites controversy, see D. Mungello, editor, The Chinese

Rites Controversy: Its History and Meaning (Nettetal, North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany: Steyler

Verlag, 1994).

74 For a specific treatment of the history of Christian missions, see Stephen Neill, A History of

Christian Missions (London: Penguin, 1964).

75 See John L. Esposito, Darrell J. Fasching, Todd Lewis, Religion & globalization: world

religions in historical perspective (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008).

122

options brought about by modernity prompted the Catholic Church to formally address its

place and role in that changing world at the Second Vatican Council.

The declaration Nostra Aetate (Our Age) could be considered the Magna Carta of the

Catholic position with regard to non-Christian religions. A short document of five and a

half pages, it is organized in concentric circles, addressing first the religions most distant

to Christianity such as Hinduism and Buddhism, acknowledging later Islam as part of the

Abrahamic heritage, and granting Judaism the highest status among non-Christian

religions and closest proximity to Christianity. It begins with an exhortation that outlines

the Catholic inter-faith plan: “The Church, therefore, urges her sons to enter with

prudence and charity into discussion and collaboration with members of other religions.

Let Christians, while witnessing to their own faith and way of life, acknowledge, preserve

and encourage the spiritual and moral truths found among non-Christians, also their

social life and culture.”76

It is significant to note that another translation of the official

Latin text uses “improve” as the third verb above instead of “encourage.” The declaration

ends with another exhortation to universal fraternity and non-discrimination.77

However,

Nostra Aetate does not stand alone regarding the Council’s attitude toward other

religions. Seven of the sixteen documents of Vatican II refer explicitly in different

degrees to the reality of other religions.

The Constitution about the Church, Lumen Gentium, breaks new ground in soteriology

(i.e. the theology of salvation) when it states that the followers of other religions can be

saved. This is such an important statement that it deserves to be fully quoted:

Those who have not yet received the Gospel are related in various ways to the

people of God. In the first place we must recall the people to whom the testament

and the promises were given and from whom Christ was born according to the

flesh. On account of their fathers this people remains most dear to God, for God

does not repent of the gifts He makes nor of the calls He issues. But the plan of

76 Decree Nostra Aetate, 2.

77 See Anthony J. Cernera, Examining Nostra Aetate after 40 years: Catholic-Jewish relations in

our time (Fairfield, Conn.: Sacred Heart University Press, 2007).

123

salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator. In the first place

amongst these there are the Mohammedans, who, professing to hold the faith of

Abraham, along with us adore the one and merciful God, who on the last day will

judge mankind. Nor is God far distant from those who in shadows and images

seek the unknown God, for it is He who gives to all men life and breath and all

things, and as Saviour wills that all men be saved. Those also can attain to

salvation who through no fault of their own do not know the Gospel of Christ or

His Church, yet sincerely seek God and moved by grace strive by their deeds to

do His will as it is known to them through the dictates of conscience. Nor does

Divine Providence deny the helps necessary for salvation to those who, without

blame on their part, have not yet arrived at an explicit knowledge of God and with

His grace strive to live a good life. Whatever good or truth is found amongst them

is looked upon by the Church as a preparation for the Gospel.78

While non-Christians and atheists may reject these statements as a patronizing attitude on

the part of the Church and might not care less, there is no doubt that this declaration is

revolutionary. From a soteriological (salvation) standpoint, the Catholic Church now

claims no patent on salvation, a position that many other Christian churches reject. For a

Church that has affirmed and confirmed in perennial theology that there is no salvation

outside the Church, Extra Ecclesiam nulla salus, the affirmation that God’s grace acts

outside the confines of the Church is quite an opening into a new theological reflection.

Another relevant document is the decree about the missionary activity of the Church, Ad

Gentes Divinitus, which “strictly forbids that anyone should be forced to accept the faith

or be induced or enticed by unworthy devices.”79

Special attention is paid to the potential

bridge between Christian and non-Christian monasticism: “[Catholic members of

religious orders] should carefully consider how traditions of asceticism and

contemplation, the seeds of which have been sown by God in certain ancient cultures

before the preaching of the Gospel, might be incorporated into the Christian life.”80

78 Constitution Lumen Gentium, 16. Official English translation from the Vatican website.

79 Decree Ad Gentes, 13.

80 Decree Ad Gentes, 18.

124

Similarly important is the declaration about religious freedom, Dignitatis Humanae,

which again is a radical departure from a previous position of mere tolerance of other

religions. 81

Other documents are of lesser importance in regards to other religions. The constitution

about Divine Revelation, Dei Verbum, states that editions of the Bible should be

specifically annotated and explained for the followers of other religions.82

The decree

about the Laity, Apostolicam Actuositatem, exhorts lay Catholics to cooperate with

followers of other religions.83

And the pastoral constitution about the Church in the

modern world, Gaudium et Spes, advocates for respect for those who profess other

religions and states that dialogue excludes no one.84

After these seminal Conciliar documents, the theme of other religions was also present in

the magisterium of Pope Paul VI, who referred to it in two Encyclicals, two Apostolic

Exhortations, two Apostolic Constitutions, and two Apostolic Letters.85

He also spoke

about and/or to other religions in nine allocutions, eight of them outside of the Vatican: in

Bethlehem, Bombay, Istanbul, Kampala, Manila, Sydney and Djakarta.86

But perhaps the

most significant initiative that unfolded in conjunction with the Council was the creation

of two official structures within the Vatican governance system to ensure the continuity

of the Council’s breakthroughs and a systematic and programmatic strategy of

engagement with other religions. On Pentecost Sunday, 1964, Pope Paul VI instituted the

81 American theologian John Courtney Murray, S.J., played a significant role in the shaping of

this document through his earlier scholarship on the subject and his involvement in the Council as

a peritus. See Dominique Gonnet, La liberté religieuse à Vatican II: la contribution de John

Courtney Murray, S.J. (Paris: Editions du Cerf, 1994).

82 Constitution Dei Verbum, 25.

83 Decree Apostolicam Actuositatem, 27.

84 Constitution Gaudium et Spes, 73 and 92.

85 For details, see Francesco Gioia, Interreligious Dialogue: The Official Teaching of the Catholic

Church (Boston: Pauline, 2006), 69-92.

86 Gioia, Interreligious Dialogue, 157-248.

125

Secretariat for Non-Christians, which would be renamed in 1988 as the Pontifical

Council for Inter-religious Dialogue.87

Ten years later, in agreement with the primacy given to Judaism in the Nostra Aetate

document, the Holy See decided that Jewish-Catholic relations should be dealt with

separately and, to that effect, it established on October 22, 1974, the Pontifical

Commission for Religious Relations with the Jews. Interestingly, the degree of closer

proximity between the Catholic Church and Judaism is also conveyed by the fact that this

commission is under the aegis of the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity.

Relations with all other non-Christian religions are channeled through the Pontifical

Council for Inter-religious Dialogue. This was the state of affairs that Cardinal Karol

Wojtila found when he became Pope John Paul II in 1978.88

John Paul II and the Assisi Event of 1986

The long and hyperactive pontificate of John Paul II would not only enact what could be

called the globalization of the papacy but would gain for the office of the bishop of

Rome, occupied by a former Polish actor, a renewed and fresh prestige beyond

Catholicity. However, John Paul II’s papacy would also embody the paradox of being

modern and anti-modern at the same time. On the one hand, he became a pilgrim Pope,

reaching out to the farthest regions of the earth, making himself available to the poor and

the rich, the young and the old, the believer and the non-believer. He amended

inquisitorial procedures from the past by lifting Galileo’s excommunication and

87 For a detailed account of the formation of the Secretariat prior to its conversion into a Pontifical

Council, see Robert Sheard, Interreligious Dialogue in the Catholic Church since Vatican II, An

Historical and Theological Study (Lewiston, N.Y.: Edwin Mellen Press, 1987), originally a

doctoral dissertation.

88 The following remarks about the life of Pope John Paul II are the writer’s own recollections,

summary and assessment of events commonly known about his long pontificate. For an analysis

of the first decade of his pontificate, see Peter Hebblethwaite, Pope John Paul II and the Church

(Kansas City: Sheed & Ward, 1995).

126

reinstating controversial writers such as Antonio Rosmini Servati and Faustina Kowalska

whose works he released from the Index of Forbidden Books. He even canonized

Kowalska and paved the way for the beatification of Rosmini, which took place in 2007.

On the occasion of the Jubilee of the year 2000, John Paul II surprised the world with an

unprecedented apology for the past sins of the members of the Church, including the

Crusades, the Inquisition and anti-Semitism. He also diversified the book of saints,

making it global and inclusive, beatifying and canonizing Catholics from every continent

and state of life, particularly lay and married. He also contributed to the collapse of

Soviet Communism and the melting of the Iron Curtain.89

On the other hand, John Paul II crushed Liberation Theology in Latin America as

unorthodox and reached out to the traditionalists who separated in opposition to Vatican

II, hoping to reinsert them into full communion with the Church. He endorsed the

ultraconservative group Opus Dei by granting the group special canonical privileges and

canonizing their controversial founder. He also slowly reshaped the episcopal college

with the appointment of a whole new generation of conservative bishops, much in his

own mold.90

But perhaps the pontifical act that reflected the most this paradox of

endorsing tradition and change at the same time was the beatification of Popes Pius IX

and John XXIII in the same ceremony, men who somewhat represent an antithesis of

each other: the Pope King, upholding the fight against modernity and in favor of the

absolute supremacy of his office through pontifical infallibility, and the Good Pope,

embracing modernity and promoting the collegiality of the bishops as his effective and

needed collaborators in the leadership of the Church universal.91

89 See Irving Greenberg, "John Paul II: assessing his legacy." Commonweal 132.8 (2005): 13+,

GALE|A132230435.

90 See Javier PÈrez PellÛn, Wojtyla, el ˙ltimo cruzado: un papado medieval en el fin del milenio

(Madrid : Ediciones Temas de Hoy, 1994).

91 See John W. O’Malley, "The Beatification of Pope Pius IX: Do we judge Pius's conduct against

the standards of his day or ours?" America, Aug. 26 (2000): 6, accessed June 29, 2012,

http://www.americamagazine.org/content/article.cfm?article_id=2118.

127

There is also another aspect of the pontificate of John Paul II that makes his papacy stand

out in the whole history of Christianity and central to Catholic participation in the

Centennial Parliament of Religions: his reaching out to other religions. The specific

historical circumstances of John Paul II’s life, shaped by a global war and an oppressive

political regime, and his personal conviction of the force and power of religion, vividly

verified throughout his pastoral trips around the world, prompted him to take the

unprecedented initiative of issuing a call to prominent representatives of the religions of

the world to join together and pray for peace. The United Nations proclaimed the year

1986 as the International Year of Peace and, on same day and from the same place that

his predecessor John XXIII had convoked the Second Vatican Council seventeen years

earlier, at the conclusion of the Octave of Prayer for Christian Unity, on the eighth year

of his pontificate, John Paul II issued an invitation:

I launch a pressing appeal to all Christian brothers and sisters and to all persons of

good will to join during this year in incessant and fervent prayer to implore from

God the gift of peace. The Holy See wishes to contribute to the arousal of a world

movement of prayer for peace which, surpassing the boundaries of individual

nations and involving believers of all religions, will reach the point of embracing

the entire world…

I wish to announce on this solemn occasion that I am initiating opportune

consultations with the leaders, not only of the various Christian Churches and

communities, but also of the other religions of the world, to organize with them a

special meeting of prayer for peace, in the city of Assisi. The seraphic figure of

St. Francis has transformed this place into a center of universal brotherhood. It

will be a day of prayer, in which the spiritual movement mentioned above will

have one of its most significant and important moments. The date and details of

this meeting will be decided as soon as possible, in agreement with those who will

accept the invitation to take part.92

The meeting was scheduled for October 27, 1986, ninety-one years after Pope Leo XIII

issued his letter to Cardinal Francesco Satolli discouraging interfaith gatherings not

92 Pope John Paul II, “Homily at St. Paul’s Outside the Walls, Rome, January 25, 1986,” in Assisi,

World Day of Prayer for Peace, 27 October 1986, ed. Pontifical Commission “Iustitia et Pax,”

(Vatican City: Vatican Polygot Press, 1987), 13-14. This homily was delivered on the occasion of

the Conclusion of the Octave of Prayer for the Unity of Christians.

128

hosted by the Church in the aftermath of the first Parliament of Religions. Probably

without realizing it, the Pope’s initiative was in full compliance with that earlier directive

of his predecessor as he was the one who extended the invitation and would host the

event. However, two predecessors had formally insisted on discouraging any inter-

religious meetings. In 1917 Pope Benedict XV promulgated the Code of Canon Law

which forbade “Catholics from holding disputations or meetings … with non-

Catholics…”93

His successor, Pope Pius XI, insisted on the subject, this time with the

formality of an encyclical letter.94

In Mortalium Animos, issued on January 6, 1928, Pius

XI stated the following about those working towards religious unity:

For since they hold it for certain that men destitute of all religious sense are very

rarely to be found, they seem to have founded on that belief a hope that the

nations, although they differ among themselves in certain religious matters, will

without much difficulty come to agree as brethren in professing certain doctrines,

which form as it were a common basis of the spiritual life. For which reason

conventions, meetings and addresses are frequently arranged by these persons, at

which a large number of listeners are present, and at which all without distinction

are invited to join in the discussion, both infidels of every kind, and Christians,

even those who have unhappily fallen away from Christ or who with obstinacy

and pertinacity deny His divine nature and mission. Certainly such attempts can

nowise be approved by Catholics, founded as they are on that false opinion which

considers all religions to be more or less good and praiseworthy, since they all in

different ways manifest and signify that sense which is inborn in us all, and by

which we are led to God and to the obedient acknowledgment of His rule. Not

only are those who hold this opinion in error and deceived, but also in distorting

the idea of true religion they reject it, and little by little turn aside to naturalism

and atheism, as it is called; from which it clearly follows that one who supports

those who hold these theories and attempt to realize them, is altogether

abandoning the divinely revealed religion.95

93 Canon 1325. See Tom Stransky, “Roman Catholic Church and Pre-Vatican Ecumenism,” in

Dictionary of the Ecumenical Movement, ed. Nicholas Lossky (Geneva: WCC Publications,

2002), 996-998.

94 This encyclical constitutes a foundational document for the critics of the Assisi initiative. See

Johannes Dörmann, Pope John Paul II’s Theological Journey to the Prayer Meeting of Religions

in Assisi, Part I (Kansas City, Missouri: Angelus Press, 1994), 1-7.

95 Pope Pius XI, encyclical letter Mortalium Animos, January 6, 1928, 2. Official English

translation from the Vatican website.

129

As seen earlier, this extreme caution towards mingling with non-Catholics, so

characteristic of the Anti-Modernist spirit, would slowly loosen during ensuing decades.

During World War II, Pope Pius XII extended an invitation to “all men of good will” to

work together for a peaceful world order in his Christmas messages of 1939, 1941 and

1942. In the post-war period, the ecumenical movement continued to grow as an

endeavor of Protestants and Orthodox Christians, who regretted the absence of Catholics

from their initiatives.96

In view of the new circumstances, the Sacred Congregation of the

Holy Office issued an instruction on February 28, 1950 to the Catholic bishops

throughout the world, authorizing and encouraging them to appoint suitable candidates to

confer with Christian non-Catholics. 97

An important feature of this document is that it

distinguishes between meetings to discuss matters pertaining to religion and theology and

gatherings to work for the common good. It also allowed Catholics to recite the Lord’s

Prayer with non-Catholics, something that had already taken place almost sixty years

earlier during the Parliament of Religions in Chicago but raised objections from Church

conservatives.

The Assisi initiative of John Paul II did not invite discussion of theological or ethical

matters. While focused on the ethical issue of peace, it was intended to be an affirmation

of commitment to a culture of peace through prayer. The worship nature of the Pope’s

invitation raised the controversial issue of the so-called communicatio in sacris cum

acatholicis, that is participation in public worship with non-Catholics. However, on the

eve of the event and aware of the discomfort and criticism that his Assisi initiative was

eliciting in some Catholic sectors, the Pope clarified that the participants would not pray

together but would simply be witnesses of each other’s prayers:

96 For a very helpful account of early Roman Catholic ecumenical initiatives, see Paul M. Minus,

Jr. The Catholic Rediscovery of Protestantism, A History of Roman Catholic Ecumenical

Pioneering (New York: Paulist Press, 1976). Particularly relevant are The Malines Conversations,

55-58.

97 Carlton Hayes, “Cooperation with non-Catholics,” Editorial of America magazine, 65, 8 March

11 (1950): 207.

130

What will take place in Assisi will certainly not be religious syncretism but a

sincere attitude of prayer to God in an atmosphere of mutual respect. For this

reason the formula chosen for the gathering at Assisi is: being together in order to

pray. Certainly, we cannot “pray together,” namely, to make a common prayer,

but we can be present while others pray. In this way we manifest our respect for

the prayer of others and for the attitude of others before the divinity; at the same

time, we offer them the humble and sincere witness of our faith in Christ, Lord of

the universe.98

The Pope appointed French Cardinal Roger Etchegaray, who was the President of the

Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace, to organize the event and he enlisted two lay-led

organizations for the program and logistics, the Focolare Movement and the Community

of Saint Egidio.99

The Focolare Movement was founded by Chiara Lubich in the context

of the Second World War as a practical call to unity inspired in the most basic Christian

message of the gospel. The Community of St. Egidio was formed in the aftermath of the

Second Vatican Council and ever since has gathered in the Roman quarter of the

Trastevere for daily prayers at which all are welcome. The Assisi event was arranged as

part of the program for a papal pastoral visit to Perugia.

In the weeks prior to the scheduled gathering, L’Osservatore Romano, the Vatican

newspaper, published a series of articles in relation to the event written by high-ranking

Vatican officials. The Pope’s initiative to pray for peace was seen by Jorge Mejía, Vice-

President of the Pontifical Commission “Iustitia et Pax” as a response to the widespread

secularism of the end of the twentieth century. Cardinal Francis Arinze, President of the

Secretariat for Non-Christians, referred to it as “an unprecedented step” in the history of

religions and Philippe Delhaye, General Secretary of the International Theological

Commission, called it “a prophetic sign” of the papacy of John Paul II. Angelo Scola, of

the John Paul II Institute of the Pontifical Lateran University, perceived the event as “a

98 Pope John Paul II, “General Audience, Rome, October 22, 1986,” in Assisi, World Day of

Prayer for Peace, ed. Pontifical Commission “Iustitia et Pax,” 26.

99 Sandro Magister, “John Paul II and the Other Religions: From Assisi to ‘Dominus Iesus,’”

Tokyo, June 18, 2003. Magister presented this address on the occasion of the 25th anniversary of

the pontificate of John Paul II, an initiative of Italy’s foreign ministry in 25 cities across the

globe, accessed June 29, 2012, http://chiesa.espresso.repubblica.it/articolo/19632?eng=y.

131

happening of culture and civilization,” while Marcello Zago, Superior General of the

Missionary Oblates of Mary Immaculate and former Secretary of the Secretariat for Non-

Christians, identified prayer as an education for and a road to peace. Zago’s syntactic

precision also helped clarify what the world religious leaders were to do in Assisi: “they

will not pray together, but they will be together to pray.” Zago’s clarification was

relevant because the event could be misunderstood in several ways. Pietro Rosssano,

Chancellor of the Pontifical Lateran University, warned everyone “not to run the risk of

being diverted and confused by the originality and the spectacular aspect of the event,”

while Max Thurian, of the Taizé Community and a member of the “Faith and

Constitution” Commission of the World Council of Churches, warned that any unwanted

form of religious syncretism “would violate the participants’ conscience.” On the

contrary, far from falling into syncretism, for Thurian the Assisi event should be seen as

“a model of prayer among believers… respectful of the other’s convictions.” Jesús

Castellano Cervera, a Discalced Carmelite and the Vice President of the Pontifical

Theological Faculty and Pontifical Institute of Spirituality “Teresianum”, referred to the

method of getting together to pray separately as a “profound dialogue of silence by

listening to each other’s prayer.” And on the eve of the event, Emilio Castro, a prominent

Protestant worldwide and Secretary General of the World Council of Churches,

anticipated that it would be “a day of great spiritual enrichment” and that the event would

serve “to stir the conscience of mankind.” 100

100 Jorge Mejía, “A Theological Reflection of the World Day of Prayer for Peace,” L’Osservatore

Romano, September 17, 1986; Card. Francis Arinze, “The Contribution of the Various Religions

to the Building of Peace,” L’Osservatore Romano, October 11, 1986; Philippe Delhaye, “Unity

and Multiplicity of Prayers for Peace in Assisi,” L’Osservatore Romano, October 4, 1986; Angelo

Scola, “Being together to pray for peace, L’Osservatore Romano, October 11, 1986; Marcello

Zago, “Religions for Peace,” L’Osservatore Romano, October 15, 1986; Pietro Rossano, “Prayer

as a Human Need and the possibility of sharing it,” L’Osservatore Romano, October 18, 1986;

Max Thurian, “In the Greatest Respect for all forms of Prayer,” L’Osservatore Romano, October

22, 1986; Jesús Castellano Cervera, “The Relationship with God in Prayer as a Way of Meeting

with Other Believers,” L’Osservatore Romano, October 24, 1986; Emilio Castro, “In Assisi to

Stir the Conscience of Humanity,” L’Osservatore Romano, October 25, 1986; all in Assisi, World

Day of Prayer for Peace, ed. Pontifical Commission “Iustitia et Pax,” 36, 39, 50, 61, 67-68, 71,

75-76, 78, 82.

132

On October 27, 1986, one hundred and fifty representatives of twelve religions were

present in the town of Saint Francis to attend the Pope’s convocation. There were

Aboriginals from Africa and North America, Shintoists, Hindus, Jains, Tibetan

Buddhists, Mahayanan Buddhists from Japan and Korea, Muslims, Sikhs, Zoroastrians,

Jews, and Christians.101

There were Shintoists from five different temples in Japan. The

Tibetan delegation was presided by His Holiness the Dalai Lama. Buddhist delegates

from Japan included the heads of the Tendai Order, the Zen-Soto Order (Eihei-ji), the

Shingon Order (Koyasan), the Jodoshin Order (Honganji-ha), the Japan Religious

Committee for the World Federation, and Rissi Kosei Kai. Korean Buddhists at the event

represented the Cho-gye Order. There were Muslims from the World Muslim League of

Saudi Arabia, the High Council of Ulamas of Morocco, the Islamic Call Society of Libya,

the Supreme Council of Kenya Muslims, the Mosque of Cocody in Cote d’Ivoire,

Turkey’s Department of Religious Affairs, and the Islamic Cultural Center of Italy. One

of the Hindu delegates was Rev. Swami Bhavyananda of the Ramakrishna Center in

Buckinghamshire, Great Britain, the order that would be instrumental in organizing the

Centennial Parliament of Religions in Chicago seven years after the Assisi event.

Among the Christian delegates, there were representatives of the Syrian Patriarchate of

Antiochia and all the East, the Armenian Catholicossate of Etchmiadzine, the Armenian

Catholicossate of Cilicia, the Syrian Church of India, and the Assyrian Church of the

East. Representatives of the Orthodox Churches included the Ecumenical Patriarchate,

the Greek Orthodox Patriarchate of Antiochia, and Orthodox Churches of Russia,

Georgia, Rumania, Bulgaria, Czechoslovakia, and Finland. There were also delegates

from the Old Catholic Church of the Netherlands, the Anglican Communion, the

Lutheran World Federation, The World Alliance of Reformed Churches, the World

Methodist Council, the Disciples of Christ, the Baptist World Alliance, the World

Council of Churches, the Reformed Ecumenical Synod, the Mennonite World

Conference, the Friends World Committee for Consultation (Religious Society of

101 The following information is from the official Vatican report after the event in Pontifical

Commission “Iustitia et Pax,” Assisi, World Day of Prayer for Peace, 189-201.

133

Friends, Quakers), the World Young Women’s Christian Association, the World Young

Men’s Christian Association, and the International Association for Religious Freedom

(IARF) with close ties to the Unitarian Church. Neither a General Assembly of the most

diverse World Council of Churches nor the most ambitious General Conference of the

World Conference of Religions for Peace ever assembled in a single gathering such a

diverse and official delegation of top religious leaders combining both the religions of the

world and the internal diversity within Christianity. The reunion of Christians alone

including Oriental Churches, Orthodox Churches and the various branches that sprang

from the Protestant Reformation is an ecumenical marvel of great historical uniqueness

and significance. Cardinal Johannes Willebrands, President of the Vatican Secretariat for

Promoting Christian Unity, declared that “Assisi must rank as one of the more notable

ecumenical events since the Second Vatican Council.”102

The program for that historic day consisted of four parts: an opening ceremony, separate

prayer services at different locations, silent processions from those locations to the

Basilica of St. Francis, and a closing ceremony at the lower square of the Basilica.103

First, the Pope welcomed the delegates at the Basilica of Our Lady of the Angels, which

houses the little chapel (the Portiuncula) restored by Francis of Assisi during his

conversion. An opening ceremony took place in the interior of the Basilica. Sixty-one

religious delegates stood next to the Pope in a semi-circular arrangement. To his right

were the representatives of the Christian Churches and ecclesial communities with the

delegate of the Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople and the Anglican Archbishop of

Canterbury immediately next to the Pope. There were five women among the Christian

delegates. To his left were the delegates of the non-Christian religions with the Dalai

102 Card. Johannes Willebrands, “Assisi: An Ecumenical Event,” in Assisi, World Day of Prayer

for Peace, ed. Pontifical Commission “Iustitia et Pax,” 167.

103 An interesting and warm insider’s account is provided by the Franciscan Friar Antonio M.

Rosales, O.F.M. in “The Day Assisi Became the ‘Peace Capital’ of the World,” Saint Anthony

Messenger, January, 1987, reproduced in AmericanCatholic.org, accessed June 29, 2012,

http://www.americancatholic.org/Features/Assisi/PeaceCapital.asp. Friar Rosales attended as the

representative of the Ambassador of the Philippines to the Holy See.

134

Lama immediately next to the Pope. In his welcoming remarks the Pope clearly stated the

religious nature of the event:

The coming together of so many religious leaders to pray is in itself an invitation

today to the world to become aware that there exists another dimension of peace

and another way of promoting it, which is not a result of negotiations, political

compromises, or economic bargainings. It is the result of prayer, which, in the

diversity of religions, expresses a relationship with a supreme power that

surpasses our human capacities alone. We come from afar, nor only, for many of

us, by reason of geographical distance, but above all because of our respective

historical and spiritual origins.104

Once in their assigned locations, the different delegations offered a prayer of peace

according to their own tradition and style, the Zoroastrians lighting their sacred fire and

the Muslims facing Mecca. The organizers took great care to accommodate such diverse

prayer styles and practices, and to make the various guests feel comfortable to perform

their rituals while respecting the traditions of the Catholic hosts.105

Christians of all the denominations indicated above met at the Church of Saint Rufino,

the Cathedral of Assisi, where the Pope addressed them:

Despite the serious issues which still divide us, our present degree of unity in

Christ is nevertheless a sign to the world that Jesus Christ is truly the Prince of

Peace… Our prayer here should include repentance for our failures as Christians

to carry out the mission of peace and reconciliation that we have received from

Christ and which we have not yet fully accomplished.106

104 Pope John Paul II, “Opening Address in the Basilica of St. Mary of the Angels, Assisi,

October 27, 1986,” in Assisi, World Day of Prayer for Peace, ed. Pontifical Commission “Iustitia

et Pax,” 87.

105 A mishap is reported to have taken place when the Buddhists, gathered in the local Church of

Saint Peter, enthroned a statue of the Buddha on top of a tabernacle, the most sacred place for

Catholics, where the Eucharist is kept for the adoration of the faithful, even though the tabernacle

was emptied for the occasion.

106 Pope John Paul II, “Introduction to Christian Prayer for Peace in the Cathedral of St. Rufino,

Assisi, October 27, 1896,” in Assisi, World Day of Prayer for Peace, ed. Pontifical Commission

“Iustitia et Pax,” 90-91.

135

The residents of the medieval town of Assisi were filled with interest and curiosity as the

processions of leaders from the different religious traditions walked through its crooked

streets towards the Basilica of St. Francis. Once there, the leaders gathered in the lower

square in a similar arrangement to that of the morning, Christians to the right and non-

Christians to the left of the Pope. After a representative of each religion stood and

addressed the assembly from the podium and the Christian representative offered the

Lord’s prayer, the Pope offered his concluding remarks referring to himself “as a brother

and friend”:

It is my faith conviction which has made me turn to you, representatives of the

Christian Churches and ecclesial communities and world religions, in deep love

and respect. With the other Christians we share many convictions and,

particularly, in what concerns peace. With the world religions we share a common

respect of and obedience to conscience, which teaches all of us to seek the truth,

to love and serve all individuals and peoples, and therefore to make peace among

individuals and among nations.107

After the historic day in Assisi, the delegates made their way to Rome to be hosted one

more time by the Pope in the Vatican before returning to their various places of origin

across the globe. Gathered in St. Peter, the Pope offered his farewell with an important

reference to the golden rule:

Jesus Christ, whom we Christians believe and proclaim to be our Lord and Savior,

reminded us of the golden rule: “Treat others as you would like them to treat you”

(Lk. 6:31). Your various religious creeds may have a similar injunction which

meets an imperative of every human conscience. The observance of this golden

rule is an excellent foundation of peace. Peace needs to be built on justice, truth,

freedom, and love. Religions have the necessary function of helping to dispose

human hearts so that true peace can be fostered and preserved.108

107 Pope John Paul II, “Concluding Address in the Lower Square of St. Francis, Assisi, October

27, 1986,” in Assisi, World Day of Prayer for Peace, ed. Pontifical Commission “Iustitia et Pax,”

93-94.

108 Pope John Paul II, “Address to the Leaders of Non-Christian Religions present at Assisi,

Rome, October 29, 1986,” in Assisi, World Day of Prayer for Peace, ed. Pontifical Commission

“Iustitia et Pax,” 137.

136

With this final gathering in Rome, the Assisi initiative was adjourned leaving many

Catholics, both those who favored and opposed the gathering with the feeling that

something truly transcendental had happened, for better or worse respectively in the city

of St. Francis. These reactions, pro and con, among Catholics were similar to those

following Catholic involvement in the Chicago Parliament of Religions the previous

century. However, something absolutely unique was at stake this time. The Pope himself

was at the vortex of the Assisi gathering. On the one hand, supporters of the event

celebrated it as the epitome of universal fraternity and respect of religious differences for

the sake of peace. On the other hand, opponents condemned it with various degrees of

disapproval that ranged from looking at it as lending to misunderstanding and confusion

to denouncing it as the work of the devil through the good offices of “anti-Pope” John

Paul II. Among the ones scandalized by the event were those who also dissented from the

Second Vatican Council, who saw in Assisi the ultimate actualization of the disastrous

deeds of the Council. To them Assisi was a self-inflicted wound by which the Church

was denying itself the position as the one true Church –the only successor of God’s

covenant.109

The aftermath of the Assisi event saw the organization of similar inter-faith gatherings at

a local level in various locations during the several years that followed. Rome, Warsaw,

Bari, Malta, and Assisi again hosted small-scale inter-religious meetings in what was

known as the “Spirit of Assisi.”110

That stream of enthusiasm crossed the Atlantic and

motivated ecumenical and inter-faith activists in the United States to organize an Assisi-

like conference on American soil, attended by the some of the early dreamers of the

109 There are numerous sites on the World Wide Web that highlight concerns about the

implications of the Assisi gathering in 1986. These sites are launched by traditionalist Catholics

who identify the event as a blatant break with millenary Catholic tradition and sound Catholic

doctrine. See for example, DICI, Documentation Information Catholiques Internationales, the

communication agency of the Priestly Society of St. Pius X,

http://www.dici.org/en/documents/assisi-i-october-27-1986-letter-of-archbishop-lefebvre-to-

eight-cardinals-august-27-1986/, accessed June 29, 2012.

110 An assessment of the Assisi event a decade later is offered by François Boespflug and Yves

Labbé, editors, Assise, dix ans aprés: 1986-1996 (Paris: Les Editions du Cerf, 1996).

137

possibility to re-convene a Parliament of Religions in Chicago as the centenary of the

largely forgotten event began to appear in the horizon.

Efforts to barricade the Church from the threat of modernity and polluting contact with

non-Catholics had turned around 180 degrees. The Church opened doors to interfaith

contact and mutual understanding. The Church that advised against the rubbing of

religious shoulders with others after the first Parliament of Religions in 1893, officially

considering such fellowship a threat to the faith of Catholics, would be a working force in

the Centennial Parliament in 1993.

138

“Your efforts deserve our most careful consideration”

The Vatican’s efforts to prevent a Parliament of Religions from taking place during the

Paris World Exhibition of 1900 and Cardinal Francesco Satolli’s discouragement of a

plan for a second American Parliament of Religions at the St. Louis World Exhibition of

1904 (also known as the Louisiana Purchase World’s Fair) helped put the Parliament idea

on hold. Furthermore, the Catholic Church’s crusade against Modernism during the first

decades of the twentieth century made official Catholic involvement in any interfaith

initiative inconceivable. But Catholic refusal to participate did not prevent the interfaith

movement from developing. This global movement, born at the 1893 Parliament of

Religions in Chicago, had concrete expressions in the International Association for

Religious Freedom (1900), the World Congress of Faiths (1936), the Temple of

Understanding (1960) and the World Conference on Religion and Peace (1970). These

international interfaith networks grew almost totally independent of the Catholic Church,

although there were some notable and individual exceptions including the key and steady

involvement of Roman Catholic Archbishop Angelo Fernandes of Delhi, India, in the

World Conference on Religion and Peace (WCRP) and the occasional presence of

Catholic world figures, such as Archbishop Helder Camara of Recife, Brazil, also in the

WCRP, and of Mother Theresa and Thomas Merton in the Spiritual Summits organized

by the Temple of Understanding. At the local level, a growing number of grassroots

Catholics also proved open to some association with these and other interfaith

initiatives.1 However, the giant strides made in the Catholic dialogue with the modern

world and other religions following Vatican II, reinforced by the groundbreaking

interfaith Assisi initiative of John Paul II, radically changed the climate for Catholic

involvement in the global interfaith movement.

1 See Marcus Braybrooke, Pilgrimage of Hope: One Hundred Years of Global Inter-Faith

Dialogue (London: SCM Press Ltd, 1992).

139

This chapter returns to Chicago and explores how the memory of the 1893 Parliament of

Religions remained alive for those who benefited the most from it, particularly the

Vedantists and the Baha’is, and how the centenary of the 1893 event revived interest in

holding a modern Parliament. Conversations about organizing a centennial Parliament of

Religions began at least a decade before the anniversary, but concrete planning only

began with the establishment of the Council for a Parliament of the World’s Religions

(CPWR) in 1988. A major milestone in the Chicago centennial planning was the decision

of the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Chicago to endorse the event. The Catholic

endorsement paralleled the endorsement of the Parliament by the Council of Religious

Leaders of Metropolitan Chicago (CRLMC), of which the Archbishop of Chicago,

Cardinal Joseph Bernardin, was an influential founding member.

Even with these endorsements, some doubted the Parliament would take place, let alone

be a success. Plagued by financial and organizational problems, even Parliament planners

were surprised when, in the last few weeks before the Parliament opened, all the pieces

fell into place and the number of registrations surpassed expectations. This chapter

explores the planning for the 1993 Parliament. It is divided into three main sections:

efforts to raise awareness of the upcoming Parliament centennial and the constitution of

the Council for a Parliament of the World’s Religions; the decision of the Catholic

Church to participate; and the challenges faced by the organizers in bringing the

Parliament idea to fruition.

Towards a Centennial Celebration of the 1893 World’s

Parliament of Religions

The centennial celebration of the 1893 Parliament of Religions has a significant

antecedent in another anniversary. Forty years after the first Parliament of Religions,

Chicago celebrated its centennial. For the occasion, the city organized the Century of

Progress World’s Fair. The official Catholic reluctance to get involved in interfaith

gatherings that sank any hope of holding a second Parliament of Religions at the St.

Louis World’s Fair in 1904 did not prevent interested individuals in Chicago from

140

attempting to pull together a gathering of religious leaders, with or without Catholic

participation. There was a model for doing so: the Catholic Church was absent from the

Edinburgh International Missionary Conference in 1910, acknowledged as a foundational

event of the modern ecumenical movement. Similarly, the Catholic Church was officially

absent from this lesser known interfaith initiative held in conjunction with the 1933

Chicago centenary.

The 1933 Parliament of Religions in Chicago2

This 1933 parliament of religions was convened as the International Convention of the

World Fellowship of Faiths. The World Fellowship of Faiths was the successor

organization to the so-called “Threefold Movement,” which combined the League of

Neighbors—for racial unity—founded by Chicago social activist Charles Frederick

Weller in 1918; the Union of East and West –for cultural unity--founded by London

Orientalist Kedarnath Das Gupta; and the Fellowship of Faiths –for religious unity—

founded jointly by Weller and Das Gupta in 1925. Weller and Das Gupta combined in

organizing an interfaith gathering in Chicago referred to by some as the second

Parliament of Religions and by others as the first International Convention of the World

Fellowship of Faiths.3 As Weller testifies, “[for] the first time in history, people of All

Faiths, Races and Countries are drawing together –seeking spiritual solutions for man’s

Present problems- such as War, Persecution, Prejudice, Poverty/Amidst/Plenty,

Antagonistic Nationalisms, Ignorance, Hatred, Fear.” This was certainly true in the

context of the American Depression and emerging ideologies of Fascism and Nazism in

Europe. Weller’s use of capital letters seems to emphasize both the inclusive approach of

2 The primary source of information on the 1933 Parliament of Religions is the published

proceedings of the event edited by its organizers. See Charles Frederick Weller, editor, World

Fellowship, Addresses and Messages by leading spokesmen of all Faiths, Races and Countries

(New York: Liveright Publishing Corporation, 1935). Marcus Braybrooke offers a helpful

summary of the event. See Marcus Braybrooke, Inter-Faith Organizations, 1983-1979 (New

York: Edwin Mellen Press, 1980), 167-170.

3 See Weller’s own account in “ History and Fundamentals of the World Fellowship of Faiths,” in

Weller, World Fellowship, 528-537.

141

the organizers and the social orientation of the program. While the 1893 Parliament has

been appraised as a predominantly Christian and Anglo-Saxon affair, the 1933 Parliament

extended an invitation to participate not only to mainstream religions but to “All Faiths,

Races and Countries.” Furthermore, although fifteen years had passed since the end of

the First World War, the memory of its devastation was still vivid. Peace became a

central theme of this second Parliament, which drew the attention of peace activists.4

The event took place at the Morrison Hotel in Chicago from August 27 to September 17,

1933, a period of twenty-two days with a total of fifty programs organized in two or three

sessions daily. In addition to the main Chicago program, twenty-three supplementary

sessions took place in New York City between October 1933 and May 1934. Combining

both locations, there were 242 addresses by 199 presenters on themes of world unity,

politics, philosophy, religion, economic projects, youth, women, race, fear, security, adult

education, motion pictures, peace, war, ahimsa (non-violence), mysticism and theosophy.

Registrants included visitors from Persia, India, Ceylon, Nepal, China, Korea, Japan,

Australia, New Zealand, South Africa, the West African Gold Coast, Turkey, Bulgaria,

Hungary, Italy, France, Germany, Poland, Norway, Sweden, England, Canada, Costa

Rica, and Uruguay. Time Magazine reported that “speakers of all creeds and colors, many

of them world-famed, arose one by one.” Prominent presenters included “the seventh

richest man in the world, the temporal and spiritual head of nearly 2,500,000 Hindus and

Moslems—His Highness Sir Sayaji Rao III, the Maharaja Gaekwar of Baroda, in present-

day Gujarat, India,”5 Buddhist leader Angarika Dharmapala –leading Buddhist

representative in the 1893 Parliament, American philosopher John Dewey, and –in the

New York sessions—English spiritual writer Sir Francis Younghusband, founder of the

World Congress of Faiths.6

4 Weller, World Fellowship, v.

5 “Religion: Fellowship of Faiths,” Time Magazine, Monday, September 11, 1933, accessed June

25, 2012, http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,746034-1,00.html

6 Younghusband’s participation is also reported by Marcus Braybrooke, “The Beginning of the

World Congress of Faiths,” accessed June 25, 2012, www.worldfaiths.org /TheBeginning.php.

142

The Baha’i Faith, which made its first appearance in the West during the 1893

Parliament, was also formally represented in the 1933 Parliament. So too was

Mormonism, which was absent in the 1893 Parliament. The Sikh religion, recently

established in North America at the time of the original Parliament, was present in the

second one. A regretted absence was that of Mohandas Gandhi, who declined a personal

invitation with a cabled message: “Fellowship of Faiths attainable only by mutual respect

in action for faiths.” When previously asked for a written message to be conveyed to the

participants, Gandhi replied: “What message can I send through the pen if I am not

sending any through the life I am living? Let me for the present try to live the life as it

may please God.”7

Like the 1893 Parliament, the 1933 gathering counted active female participation. Both

Chicago Peace activist Jane Addams—the 1931 Nobel Peace laureate—and Holyoke

College President Mary E. Woolley –America’s woman delegate to the Disarmament

Conference in Geneva—addressed the Parliament. The participation of Maud Ballington

Booth, leader of the American Volunteer movement and daughter-in-law of the founders

of the Salvation Army in England, together with African-American anti-racism activist

Mary Church Terrel and birth control advocate Margaret Sanger underscore the spectrum

of interests, causes and ideologies reflected among women present at the 1933

Parliament. Prominent women also came from overseas. Among them were Madam Dr.

Muthulakshmi Reddi –the first woman legislator in India; Muriel Lester –a settlement

worker from East London, England; and Mary Hanford Ford—a spokesperson for the

Baha’i Faith in England, Ireland, and Switzerland.

Although the Roman Catholic Church was not officially represented at the 1933

Parliament, one of the most prominent lay Catholic leaders in America at the time,

Patrick Henry Callahan, did participate. Born in Cleveland, Ohio, Callaghan settled in

Kentucky where he became an industrialist noteworthy for his commitment to the labor

7 See “Messages to World Fellowship of Faiths,” accessed June 25, 2012, http://www.mkgandhi-

sarvodaya.org/letters/unstates/world_fellowship.htm.

143

cause. Through a partnership with social analyst and activist Fr. John Ryan of the

Catholic University of America, Callahan implemented an innovative profit-sharing plan

at his plant. He was also one of the organizers of the National Catholic War Council,

which would eventually evolve into the National Conference of Catholic Bishops in the

United States. Callahan also held several lay-Catholic leadership positions, including

chairman of the Knights of Columbus. Callahan’s address at the 1933 Parliament was

entitled “A Century of Tolerance” and, as the sole Roman Catholic speaker at the event,

he was introduced as having been honoured by Pope Pius XI with a papal knighthood, a

clear emphasis on his Catholic identity and good standing within the Church. But his

presence in the Parliament was in no way endorsed by the Church. It was a personal act.

Moreover, in what seemed a violation of Church policy regarding ecumenical and

interfaith relations at the time, Callahan was also the Vice Chairman of the National

Council of the World Fellowship of Faiths.8

The same Pope that acknowledged Callahan’s merits by making him a Knight of St.

Gregory also authored the 1928 encyclical letter Mortalium Animos, five years before this

Parliament of Religions, in which the pontiff denounced the dangers of the ecumenical

movement, including the possibility that it might lead to naturalism and atheism, and

strongly discouraged any Catholic clerical or lay involvement in it. Much as Callahan’s

Catholic roots were noted, he was not officially or unofficially speaking for the Church.

The inclusive program of the 1933 Parliament of Religions certainly confirmed the

Pope’s concerns. Episcopalian Bishop William Montgomery Brown gave a talk entitled

“Communism –The New Faith for a New World.” Nor was the Pope alone in his

concerns. Brown –also known as the Bad Bishop- was the first Anglican bishop since the

Reformation to be tried for heresy and the first American bishop ever deposed on the

8 For a comprehensive biography of Callahan, see William Ellis, Patrick Henry Callahan 1866-

1940: Progressive Catholic Layman in the American South (Lewiston, N.Y.: E. Mellen Press,

1989). See reference to his involvement in the 1933 Parliament of Religions on pages 108-109.

144

grounds of harboring heretical views.9

Following the lead of its 1893 predecessor, the 1933 Parliament was largely the result of

the labor of individuals with strong liberal leanings and not of endorsing institutions. Not

all assessments of the event are positive. DePaul University Professor George F. Hall

comments that “participants came on their own credentials. Some presented papers, they

left and there was no genuine plenary session. The meetings were dominated by quasi-

religious political groups who hoped to duplicate [the] success of Swami Vivekananda in

1893 in getting publicity and support. Scholars sensed this ‘sensation seeking’

atmosphere and retreated quickly lest they be caught in the limelight with these leaders

and be publicized accordingly, i.e. guilt by association.”10

But not everyone “retreated

quickly.” Interfaith chronicler Marcus Braybrooke observes that during its almost three

weeks “twenty seven gatherings were held in Chicago, with a massive total attendance of

44,000 people.” Nonetheless, he also argues that the 1933 Parliament is “still a forgotten

event.”11

Interestingly, this Parliament of Religions did not have a monopoly on religion at the

1933 Chicago Exhibition. Time Magazine reported: “Piety at the Fair is represented by

Christian Scientist and Roman Catholic exhibits, and a long, L-shaped Hall of Religions

with a Gothic tower, containing such churchly wares as Protestants have cared to show,

notably the silver Chalice of Antioch which may have been the Holy Grail, and Col.

9 For a comprehensive biography of Bishop Brown, see Ronald M. Carden, William Montgomery

Brown (1855-1937): The Southern Episcopal bishop who became a communist (Lewiston, N.Y.:

Edwin Mellen Press, 2007). See reference to his involvement in the 1933 Parliament on page 231.

10 George Hall to Dennis McCann, June 13, 1988, Archives of the Council for a Parliament of the

World’s Religions (ACPWR), Box 9, General Parliament Correspondence, Folder May-August

1988.

11 Marcus Braybrooke, “A Wider Vision: A History of the World Congress of Faiths, 1936 –

1996,” accessed June 25, 2012,

http://www.religion-online.org/showchapter.asp?title=3378&C=2771.

145

Henry Stanley Todd's virile portrait of Christ.”12

Furthermore, while Catholics were

forbidden to mingle with non-Catholics in events like the 1933 Parliament, they were

represented at the larger Exhibition as they were forty years earlier through the Catholic

Educational Exhibit at the Columbian Fair.13

“We are both beneficiaries”

The 1933 Chicago Parliament was not the only forgotten Parliament of Religions.

Parliament scholar Richard Seager reports that the original 1893 Chicago Parliament also

disappeared from the scholarly radar for more than half a century.14

However, there was

a group from whom memory of the 1893 Chicago Parliament never vanished, the

12 “Religion: Fellowship of Faiths,” Time Magazine, Monday, September 11, 1933, accessed June

25, 2012,

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,746034-1,00.html.

13 In addition to the second parliament of religions in Chicago, there are references to a World

Parliament of Religions revived in New York on November 15, 1953, on the occasion of the 60th

anniversary of the Chicago event, by the Rev. Richard E. Evans, director of the Presbyterian

Labor Temple, 242 East Fourteenth Street. As it was expected, no Catholics were involved in a

Board of Directors composed of Protestants, Jews, Muslims, Hindus, and Buddhists. This New

York-based Parliament of Religions was not an event but an ongoing organization. A Good Will

Tour, which included a visit to Moscow at the invitation of Metropolitan Germogen, Exarch of

the Russian Orthodox Church, is reported to have taken place in the summer of 1954. See “Thirty

Clerics to Pay a Visit to Moscow,” The New York Times, June 19, 1954, accessed June 25, 2012,

http://query.nytimes.com/mem/archive/pdf?res=FA0B12FD3F5C177B93CBA8178DD85F40858

5F9.

Furthermore, there are also references to an intended third parliament of religions to be celebrated

in 1973, but that never crystallized. The Hindu, India’s national newspaper, in December 1982

published an article referring to a letter “by one Ramamurty of Madras bemoaning the fact that

the third world parliament of religions had failed to materialise. Ramamurty made a case for

holding it 50 years later, the following year. He wrote: ‘I do hope this thought will reach Chicago

and competent person or persons will organise the third conference of religions for the unity of all

religions. May this message reach Chicago!’’” It would certainly take more than a year to

organize a third parliament of religions in Chicago. See Mohan Tikku, “After the Swami in

Chicago,” accessed June 25, 2012,

http://www.hindu.com/mag/2011/02/27/stories/2011022750310400.htm.

14 Richard Hughes Seager, “Pluralism and the American Mainstream,” in A Museum of Faiths:

Histories and Legacies of the 1893 World’s Parliament of Religions, ed. Eric Ziolkowski,

(Atlanta, GA: Scholars Press, 1993), 194-204.

146

Ramakrishna Order and its network of Vedanta Centers around the world. Ramakrishna,

also known as Paramahansa by his devotees, was a renowned Indian mystic.15

His most

prominent disciple and successor was Swami Vivekananda, who participated in the 1893

Parliament of Religions in Chicago while still a young monk. Vivekananda’s presence in

the 1893 Parliament is considered by many a highlight of the gathering. His speeches

were acclaimed as the most insightful uttered at the event. His visit to Chicago and

subsequent trips to North America are recalled as key to the penetration of Hindu thought

and practices in the West.

After two years of lecturing in the United States and England, Vivekananda returned to

India, where he organized the Ramakrishna Order and founded the Ramakrishna Math

and Mission. He and other members of the Order also established centers in North

America. Known today as Vedanta Centers, these communities have expanded across the

continent and into other parts of the world. Unlike the other charismatic gurus who

brought Hindu wisdom to the West, including Sri Aurobindo, Yogananda, Swami

Prabhupada of the Hare Krishna Movement, or Sathya Sai Baba, Vivekananda provided a

monastic organization to the early disciples of his master Ramakrishna.16

These monastic

Vedanta Societies share much in common with Western Christian monasticism. At the

same time, they also give priority to social outreach, which makes them also similar to

apostolic, non-monastic Roman Catholic religious orders.17

While Swami Vivekananda had an impact in the 1893 Parliament of Religions, the first

Chicago Parliament also served as a springboard for Vivekananda’s mission to the West

and the resulting growth and development of the Ramakrishna Order. Because of that

15 See Swami Adiswarananda, editor, Sri Ramakrishna (Woodstock, Vt.: SkyLight Paths Pub.,

2005).

16 On other influential gurus in North America, see Philip Goldberg, American Veda: from

Emerson and the Beatles to yoga and meditation: how Indian spirituality changed the West (New

York: Harmony Books, c2010).

17 See Gwilym Beckerlegge, Swami Vivekananda's legacy of service: a study of the Ramakrishna

Math and Mission (New Delhi: Oxford University Press, c2006).

147

relationship, there remained a powerful symbolic association between the original

Parliament and the Ramakrishna Order. The Order recalls the event as an axial moment

in which its founder solemnly proclaimed a message of religious unity to the world; as

such, the 1893 Parliament remains inscribed as a foundational event in the Order’s

history and a call to the Order’s universal mission. Thus, while the Parliament was

forgotten by many, memory of the 1893 Parliament was cherished in Vedantist circles.

The Order commemorated the 40th

anniversary of Vivekananda’s participation in the

1893 Parliament with celebrations in Chicago concurrent with the 1933 Parliament.18

Furthermore, the centennial of Vivekananda’s birth was commemorated with a

parliament of religions in India in 1963.19

After the Vivekananda centennial, the Order

became a key proponent of a Chicago Parliament in 1993, the centennial of the original

Parliament.

The Parliament’s centennial was also to be celebrated by the Ramakrishna Order in India

and in its Vedanta Centers across the globe; but the commemoration had a special

significance for the Vedanta Center of Chicago. Founded in 1930 by Swami

Gnaneswarananda, the center, known as the Vivekananda Vedanta Society of Chicago,

has grown to include a monastery and retreat center in Ganges, Michigan –often

frequented by Catholics involved in Hindu studies. The person responsible for this

expansion was the second successor of the Chicago founder, Swami Bhashyananda, the

Swami-in-charge of the Chicago center from 1965 to 1993. The end of his third decade of

leadership was to coincide with the Parliament centennial. It was under Bhashyananda’s

oversight that another Swami, Sarveshananda, undertook the task of reviving interest in

the 1893 Parliament and persuading prominent Chicagoans of the need and value of

organizing some sort of a centennial commemoration. This eventually crystallized into

the establishment of the Council for a Parliament of the World’s Religions that, against

18 See the official website of the Vivekananda Vedanta Society in Chicago, accessed August

2011, http://www.vedantasociety-chicago.org/chi_history.htm.

19 See Swami Vivekananda Centenary Committee, Parliament of Religions (Calcutta: Swami

Vivekananda Centenary Committee, 1963-1964).

148

heavy odds, organized the 1993 Parliament.

The earliest documented gathering of individuals interested in organizing a centennial

commemoration of the 1893 Parliament was on November 21, 1982. It counted in

attendance Swami Sarveshananda, accompanied by four other Vedantists. The meeting

took place at 1700 E. 56th

Street, Chicago, the home of John Dubocq, the only Christian

present. In addition to Dubocq and the five Vedantists, the four other attendees were a

Buddhist, a Zoroastrian, a Jew, and a Muslim. Some of these first ten participants would

remain committed to the centennial idea and saw the organizational process through more

than a decade. Several held key Board positions on the Council for a Parliament of the

World’s Religions, including Rabbi William Sulkin and Zoroastrian Rohinton Rivetna.20

The composition of the November 21, 1892 meeting reflects two significant things. First,

while the disciples of Vivekananda were the main promoters of the Parliament centennial

and felt a justified sense of ownership, they did not want to commemorate the event alone

and even less to monopolize what they held had to be an interfaith celebration. Reaching

out to other faiths in their centennial efforts reflected an ecumenical spirit, totally

consistent with their mission and vision of religious unity. Second, this original group

was almost totally comprised of representatives of religious minorities within the rich

religious landscape of metropolitan Chicago. Other “outsiders” would be joining soon,

particularly the Baha’is. In a letter to Dr. Robert Henderson of the National Spiritual

Assembly of the Baha’is of the United States, Swami Sarveshananda wrote: “As you may

know now, we Vedantists (“Hindus”) were perhaps the most notable beneficiaries of the

1893 Parliament; but we are glad to learn from Mrs. Campbell that the Baha’i movement

also had its first public mention in this country from one of the platforms of that

Parliament… We are both beneficiaries…”21

Mrs. Leilani Campbell, a member of the

20 List of attendees at meeting on November 21, 1982 at the residence of Dr. Dubocq in Chicago,

ACPWR, Box9, General Parliament Correspondence, Folder: January-February 1988.

21 Sarveshananda to Henderson, May 16, 1988, ACPWR, Box 9, General Parliament

Correspondence, Folder: May-August 1988.

149

local Baha’i community in the Chicago area, agreed. She became a steadfast supporter of

the Parliament idea and her sense of ecumenical fellowship and solidarity, together with

other Baha’i supporters, would be the major driving force in making the centennial a

reality.

Echoing events that unfolded a century earlier, the city of Chicago planned to apply to

hold a World’s Fair in 1992. Hoping to benefit from the framework a 1992 World’s Fair

would provide, Parliament enthusiasts approached the city. On January 31, 1983 a letter

was addressed to George Burke, Vice President of the Chicago World’s Fair 1992

Corporation. In it, World’s Fair organizers were introduced to the notion of convening a

Parliament of Religions in conjunction with the 1992 World’s Fair.

Such a commemorative event can only be held in Chicago. Our “Bill of Rights”

has enabled all the religions of the world to feel at home in the United States.

Chicago, as one of our nation’s major cultural centers, has all the major religions

of the world well represented within its environs. A Parliament or Festival of

Religions held here would be a fitting reflection of both the freedom of religion in

the United States and the diversity of Chicago’s religious culture.

The time is right for such a celebration. Our Twentieth century –with its growing

emphasis on the importance of scientific achievement, the computerization of life,

the enhancement of materialism, and the dominance of military power—needs the

humanizing influence of world religions.

All major religions have as their goal the illumination of life and a better

comprehension of its meaning and purpose. All stress the importance of the

spiritual, the metaphysical. All are liberation movements and emphasize the

importance of the freedom of the human spirit. And what is more, all major

religions are religions of peace –peace of mind and peace among them. Each in its

own way moves its devotees toward inner peace and its counterpart, harmonious

living with others.

The human family needs the enrichment and strength that a broad knowledge and

close relationship with other religions has to offer. In today’s shrinking world,

such a Parliament or Festival of Religions can enable us to be more comfortable

with differences and more appreciative of the beliefs and practices of others.

Moreover, and perhaps above all, it can help us discover the basic truths that unite

us.

Therefore, the undersigned, request that the Chicago World’s Fair Corporation

consider the immediate appointment of a group, committee, or commission to

150

develop the strategies for and the implementation of a Parliament or “Festival of

World Religions” to be held in conjunction with the World’s Fair in 1992.

Such a “Festival” would provide a common sharing of the beauty and the strength

of these religions as exemplified in their beliefs and practices. The values and

truths of these traditions could be demonstrated through their history, their rites

and liturgies, their art and music, their drama and scripture.

We believe that the majority of members for the Committee to develop this

“Festival of Religions” could be found among the outstanding leaders of each of

the world’s religions working in or near Chicago. If it would be helpful, we could

make recommendations or nominations for membership on such a committee. We

are also prepared to provide background information about the Parliament of 1893

and to assist the Chicago World’s Fair 1992 Corporation in any way that would be

helpful in the implementation of this proposal.22

Of the seven persons signing the letter, four were attendees at the organizational meeting

two months earlier. The signatories also deliberately underscored the religious diversity

of the early organizers by inserting their individual religious affiliations along with their

names: two Hindus associated with the Vedanta Society of Chicago, a Buddhist, a

Zoroastrian, a Jew, a Protestant, and a Roman Catholic, Thomas E. Wogan, a lay

graduate of the nearby University of Notre Dame. Interestingly, with the exception of

Rabbi William Sulkin, they were all lay people within their respective religious

traditions. Furthermore, their request to have the Fair Corporation appoint a committee

which would oversee the organization of a centennial Parliament not only implied that

financial support for the complex and costly project would, in whole or part, fall to the

World’s Fair Corporation but –perhaps inadvertently—that the control of the proposed

Parliament of Religions would be handed over to a secular entity, as had been the case

with the original Parliament, organized by the World’s Congress Auxiliary of the

Columbian Exhibition.

The potential of a Parliament of Religions sponsored by a world’s fair fell through when

the city of Chicago dropped its bid to host the 1992 Fair. This move left the pioneers of a

22 Letter to Chicago World’s Fair 1992 Corporation, January 31, 1983, ACPWR, Box 9, General

Parliament Correspondence, Folder: January-February 1988.

151

centennial Parliament uncertain about the viability of their project for five years before

anything concrete could come out of their early dreams.

Attempts of other potential stakeholders

Perhaps not realized at the time, new circumstances and new players were emerging. Two

days after the centennial pioneers signed their 1983 letter to the Chicago World’s Fair

Corporation and five months after his transfer from Cincinnati to Chicago, the Roman

Catholic Archbishop of Chicago –Joseph Bernardin- was in Rome receiving his

cardinal’s hat. Clearly committed to the changes brought by the second Vatican Council,

Cardinal Bernardin was a man of vision and a supporter of participatory leadership. He

was commissioned by his fellow American bishops to lead a committee convened to

undertake a nationwide consultation to address issues of peace, a project that was meant

to crystallize in a collective pastoral letter from the National Conference of Catholic

Bishops in the United States. But Cardinal Bernardin was best known for his proposal of

what he called a “consistent ethic of life,” intended to bridge the anti-abortion Catholic

discourse to other Catholic ethical concerns such as euthanasia and the death penalty. By

using the image of “a seamless garment” the Cardinal wanted to expand the Catholic pro-

life discourse, showing that these and other issues belonged together. Following on

Vatican II, Cardinal Bernardin was also attentive to the importance of interfaith relations

for the Catholic Church. He was taken with the Parliament centennial idea and began to

persuade prominent Chicagoans, regardless of their religious affiliation, to take up the

cause. The Cardinal approached American religious history scholar Martin Marty of the

Divinity School at the University of Chicago.

In 1983, when the World’s Fair plans fell through, Cardinal Bernardin and Dr.

Willard Boyd of the Field Museum both wrote to Dr. Marty, telling him of the

importance of having a 1993 Parliament for Chicago anyway and asking him to

do something. Dr. Marty did try to organize a committee at the Divinity School

for that purpose. However, shortly afterwards, he was appointed President of the

Park Ridge Center and two years ago was also awarded a MacArthur 5-year grant

152

to study world fundamentalisms, and these new responsibilities kept him from

being able to head up such a committee.23

The cardinal did not give up. He launched a second initiative in partnership with the

Illinois Humanities Council, but this effort also fell through due to lack of concerted

leadership and of funds.24

Two other attempts to organize a centennial parliament in Chicago also fell through.

When the University of Chicago began preparations for a celebration of the university’s

centennial, the organizing committee considered “adorning” their celebration with a

centennial parliament of religions. Swami Bhashyananda reported that “talks with several

distinguished faculty at the Divinity School, starting with Dr. Martin Marty, reveal that

long and serious attention was given to adding a parliament of religions to their

centennial program, but as the dates are separated by one year, and there were no official

delegates at the 1893 Parliament from the infant university, such plans did not

materialize. Still, there is a strong likelihood of their playing host to such a Parliament in

1993 as sequel to their Big Year.”25

However, this Parliament plan was eventually

dropped for lack of university interest. Yet another push for a centennial parliament was

begun by the National Council of Christians and Jews, led by Rev. Stanley Davis. The

group even booked the Art Institute of Chicago -where the original Parliament took

place- to hold the event. But this initiative would eventually yield to the resurrected

efforts of the early pioneers.26

Attempts to commemorate the 1893 Parliament were not limited to Chicago. In 1985, two

23 Lawrence to Kenney and Gómez-Ibáñez, June 17, 1989, ACPWR, Box 5, “The Council”

(1983-1989), Folder: Council Meeting Correspondence, January-August 1989.

24 Lawrence’s chronology of events, May 14, 1988, ACPWR, Box 9, General Parliament

Correspondence, Folder: May-August 1988.

25 Swami to Maharaj, May 1988 draft, Box9, General Parliament Correspondence, Folder: March-

April 1988.

26 Swami Sarveshananda to Druyvestein, February 19, 1988, Box9, General Parliament

Correspondence, Folder: January-February 1988.

153

years after Chicago’s unsuccessful attempt for a centennial parliament linked to a

World’s Fair, Anglican clergyman, Rev. Marcus Braybrooke of Bath, England, hosted a

meeting in Ammerdown, near Bath, of leaders of important interfaith organizations with

a global reach, including the International Association for Religious Freedom, the World

Congress of Faiths, the Temple of Understanding, and the World Conference on Religion

and Peace. Braybrooke was a pioneer in shaping the global interfaith movement. His

efforts began in the late 1970s when he compiled a historical directory of interfaith

organizations, which was decisive in rescuing the Chicago Parliament of Religions from

oblivion and crafting its rightful niche as the genesis of the modern, global interfaith

movement.27

Braybrooke’s first acquaintance with the 1893 Parliament began in his early

years as a student when he came across Barrows’ proceedings of the Parliament in the

stacks of the University of Cambridge Library.28

The Ammerdown gathering took place in a Catholic retreat house of the Sisters of Our

Lady of Sion, a religious order committed to dialogue between Jews and Christians. The

idea of the creation of a World Council of Religions was discussed, but it was eventually

dropped due to fears of bureaucratization of what most hoped should continue to be a

movement of networking rather than a fixed organizational body. Three years later, a

second meeting took place again in Ammerdown followed by other meetings in

Melbourne, Frankfurt, New York, Chichester, and Bangalore. The results of what started

in Ammerdown were manifold: a resolution to work for the declaration of 1993 as an

international year of inter-religious understanding and cooperation, the establishment of

an international interfaith organizations coordinating committee for 1993, the decision to

plan for a centennial event in New Delhi, India, along with a four-day program in

Bangalore, India, entitled “Religious People Meeting Together, Sarva-Dharma-

27 Marcus Braybrooke, Inter-Faith Organizations, 1-8; Braybrooke expanded his treatment of the

Parliament in his Pilgrimage of Hope, 5-42.

28 Marcus Braybrooke, Faith and Interfaith in a Global Age (Grand Rapids, MI: CoNexus Press,

1998), 9.

154

Sammelana,” to be held in August 1993.29

Back in Chicago, two years after the Chicago Fair plan cancellation, conversations about

the Parliament centennial resumed again under the initiative of the Vivekananda Vedanta

Society. A new Swami, Varadananda, a convert from Catholicism, joined the efforts of

Swami Sarveshananda to build a broad based committee to revitalize the centennial

initiative. They were tireless in contacting key Chicagoans hoping to get them involved.

At the beginning, meetings took place in the kitchen of the Vedanta Society of Chicago.

By the spring and summer of 1988, the meetings were rotating from the Vedanta Society

to the Chicago Baha’i Center, the Zoroastrian Association of Metropolitan Chicago, the

Unitarian Universalist Meadville/Lombard Seminary in Hyde Park, and the Common

Ground Center in Deerfield, Illinois, among other venues. In addition to Swamis

Sarveshananda and Varadananda, other names became intrinsically associated to these

renewed efforts: Vedantists Judy Lawrence and Daniel Gómez Ibáñez, Baha’is Charles

Nolley, Robert Henderson and Leilani Campbell, Zoroastrian Rohinton Rivetna,

Unitarian Universalist Gene Reeves (who was also involved in the planning of centennial

celebrations in Japan), self-identified Catholic Jim Kenney of the Common Ground

Center, United Church of Christ minister Stan Davis of the National Council of

Christians and Jews, Buddhist convert from Catholicism Ron Kidd, and DePaul

University Professor Dennis McCann among many others.

These efforts reached a milestone on March 13, 1988 when –more than five years after

the failed attempt to work with the Chicago World’s Fair Corporation- the first formal

meeting of a Parliament steering committee was held. Two initial objectives of the

committee were the legal incorporation of the organization and the formal establishment

of a Board of Management for a proposed centennial parliament of religions. On May 11,

1988 the committee voted to establish a non-profit organization and, shortly after, the

29 Braybrooke, Pilgrimage of Hope, 297-305. See also Marcus Braybrooke, “A Study Guide for

Interreligious Cooperation and Understanding,” in A Sourcebook for the Community of Religions,

ed. Joel Beverluis (Chicago: Council for a Parliament of the World’s Religions, 1993), 124.

155

initiative was incorporated as the Council for a Parliament of the World’s Religions. “The

signers of the articles of incorporation were: Dr. Paul Sherry (Community Renewal

Society, United Church of Christ), Leilani Smith-Campbell (Secretary of the Chicago

Spiritual Assembly of the Baha’is) and Dr. Daniel Gómez-Ibáñez (Director, Strategic

Business Planning, Wisconsin Power and Light, Madison, Wisconsin; also a member of

the Vedanta Society).30

The fact that the centennial Parliament would not take place

under the aegis of a World’s Fair shifted the focus of the early organizers into a more

local event, drawing on Chicago-based resources and hoping to build a solid interfaith

network in Chicago. Therefore, they changed the original name from the World’s

Parliament of Religions into a Parliament for the World’s Religions.31

On July 17, 1988

the first Board of Management was formed with Baha’i Charles Nolley as Chair,

Zoroastrian Rohinton Rivetna as Co-Chair, Vedantist Judith Lawrence as Secretary, and

Science and Religion scholar David Breed as Treasurer.32

The leadership of minority

religious groups remained particularly noticeable.

While these developments were unfolding in Chicago, enthusiasm about the idea of a

centennial commemoration was growing elsewhere. Wayne Nelles, then a PhD candidate

at the University of British Columbia, was captivated by the Parliament idea and he

became a mobilizer for a centennial celebration in Vancouver. After all, “Vancouver was

the port where many of the Asian delegates to the Parliament first landed –including

Swami Vivekananda, who made such a dramatic debut at the Parliament. So Vancouver

has some historic connections to the 1893 event and is a very fitting location for a 1993

program –a kind of ‘western gateway’ to world religions.”33

In November 1987, Nelles

30 Lawrence to University of Chicago Divinity School, April 07, 1989, ACPWR, Box 5, Folder

Council Meeting Correspondence, January-August 1989.

31 Ron Kidd, “Early Dreams and Plans for the Centennial,” in A SourceBook for the Community

of Religions, ed. Beversluis, 10.

32 CPWR Prospectus Drafts, ACPWR, Box 5, The “Council” (1983-1989), Folder: CPWR

Prospectus Drafts, Document Officers, 1988-89.

33 Lawrence to Wayne Nelles, January 20, 1989, ACPWR, Box9, General Parliament

Correspondence, Folder: January 1989.

156

released a discussion paper as an initiative towards the centennial. He soon heard about

the Chicago initiative and informed its organizers about the developments in Vancouver:

“… we have progressed substantially in terms of ideas and concrete planning. One of the

main interests in the Vancouver community, and recent focus of our planning is the idea

of establishing a Religious “United Nations” or ongoing “Parliament of Religions.” How

similar are your goals? Can we work together?”34

Nelles’ idea about linking the

centennial celebration with the foundation of some sort of religious United Nations had

already been pondered at the Ammerdown meeting by the representatives of the big

international interfaith organizations but eventually was dropped. The idea of a

Vancouver Parliament was also dropped. It transmutated into a conference project

entitled “Religion, Culture and Values in the Global Village: Understanding, Co-

operation and New Directions for Our Common Future,” organized by Nelles’ Global

Interfaith Network.35

But Nelles’ idea of a religious United Nations would still be

entertained by the Chicago organizers, with supporters like Daniel Gómez-Ibáñez, who

would go as far as meeting with representatives of UNESCO for that purpose.36

Not

everyone agreed. Among the Chicago detractors was Gene Reves, who strongly favored a

centennial with a local emphasis.37

Not far from Vancouver, in Seattle another centennial initiative was put forward by

William E. Swailes. But instead of proposing a Seattle congress, Swailes hoped to build a

resource center for the centennial commemorations. Optimistic, Swailes pledged, “Our

organization is acting as an unofficial clearing house for groups intending to

34 Nelles to Rev. Stanley Davis, February 1988, ACPWR, Box 8B, Miscellaneous

Correspondence, Folder: Correspondence and Information Concerning the Vancouver’s World’s

Parliament 1988-1990.

35 Braybrooke, Pilgrimage of hope, 304.

36 Gómez-Ibáñez to Dr. Federico Mayor-Zaragoza-UNESCO, January 3, 1993, ACPWR, Box8A,

Daniel Gómez-Ibáñez Correspondence (1990-1993), Folder: January February 1993.

37 Reeves to Lawrence, March 23, 1988, ACPWR, Box9 Folder March-April 1988.

157

commemorate the 1893 World’s Parliament of Religions.”38

The Chicago, Vancouver and Seattle initiatives clearly suggest that the North American

soil was ripe not only for a centennial commemoration of the 1893 Parliament of

Religions but for an ongoing and well-established interfaith organization with broad

reach beyond the existing ecumenical frameworks. The Assisi interfaith peace prayer

initiative of Pope John Paul II on October 27, 1986 was still vivid in the memory of

interfaith activists in North America who decided to celebrate a similar event on the

occasion of its second anniversary. With a continental planning committee that expanded

to include the Temple of Understanding, Thanksgiving Square, The United Church of

Canada, and prominent interfaith organizations from Massachusetts, New York,

Maryland, Washington DC, and Texas, the event was hosted by Interfaith Ministries,

Wichita, from October 30 to November 1, 1988, and counted in its program on prominent

interfaith scholars and practitioners, among them Professor Diana Eck from Harvard

University. Interestingly, despite its inspiration in the Pope’s initiative, neither the

planning committee nor the program indicated any official and specific Catholic

involvement.39

This conference gave birth to the North American Interfaith Network

(NAIN), now one of the largest and most active regional interfaith organizations.40

But the growing interfaith momentum of the late 1980s was not welcomed by everyone.

In Chicago, for example, Swami Sarveshananda’s laborious networking was not always

received with enthusiasm. This was certainly the case with Rev. John M. Buchanan of the

38 William E. Swailes, Coordinator of the Centennial Parliament of Religions, Bellevue, WA to

the Vivekananda Vedanta Society in Chicago, May 22, 1988, ACPWR, Box8B, Miscellaneous

Correspondence (1988-1993), Folder: Correspondence and Information Concerning the

Vancouver’s World’s Parliament 1988-1990.

39 Invitation and preliminary program of the North American Assisi, ACPWR, Box 9, General

Parliament Correspondence, Folder: March-April 1988. There were Catholic individuals and

organizations as Board or staff members of some of the interfaith organizations involved, such as

Fr. Elias Mallon, a Graymoor Friar and Board member of the Temple of Understanding, and Ms.

Elizabeth Espersen, Executive Director of Thanksgiving Square.

40 See the official website of the North American Interfaith Network (NAIN), Brief history of

NAIN by Bettina Gray, accessed June 26, 2012, http://www.nain.org/AboutUs.html.

158

4th

Presbyterian Church in Chicago, who initially distanced himself from any connection

with the parliament idea:

Dear Swami:

Neither my schedule nor my priorities will allow me to be involved in planning

for the Council for a Parliament of the World Wide Religions.

Please discontinue sending minutes of the Council meetings to me and please

remove my name from all of your mailing lists.

Thank you for your attention.41

Questioned by Rabbi Herbert Bronstein of North Shore Congregation Israel nine months

later, Buchanan softened his tone: “The simple truth is that I am unable to be a

responsible participant in many of the groups to which I have committed myself. It would

not be honest, nor very helpful for your important work.”42

Buchanan’s unavailability

stands in sharp contrast with John Barrows’ involvement as chair of the first Parliament

of Religions while pastor of the First Presbyterian Church in Chicago in 1893. However,

Barrows’ support of the Parliament was a personal initiative, since the General Assembly

of the Presbyterian Church openly condemned the event. A century later, Buchanan’s

attitude also reflected a personal stand since the Presbyterian Church in the United States

eventually became a sponsor of the 1993 centennial Parliament.43

Interestingly,

Buchanan eventually changed his mind about the Parliament and accepted to be a

41 John M. Buchanan, 4

th Presbyterian Church, to Swami Sarveshananda, September 30, 1988,

ACPWR, Box9 Folder September 1988.

42 Buchanan to Bronstein, June 13, 1989, ACPWR, Box 9, General Parliament Correspondence,

Folder: June 1989 (1 of 2).

43 Margaret Orr Thomas, Associate for Interfaith Relations, Presbyterian Church USA, Global

Mission, Ecumenical/Interfaith Relations, to Ron Kidd, April 21, 1990, Box 10, General

Parliament Correspondence, Folder: April 1990.

159

member of the Assembly of Religious and Spiritual leaders of the centennial

Parliament.44

Six months after its establishment, in December 1989 the Council for a Parliament of the

World’s Religions faced an unexpected leadership vacuum when Swami Sarveshananda

was transferred from Chicago to the Vedanta Center in Boston. He had been at the heart

of the centennial initiative and a few months later he would be formally recognized as the

founder of the Council at its first Annual Meeting.

There would be no Parliament of the World’s Religions if Swami Sarveshananda

had not pulled it into existence out of his telephone. He tells us that Swami

Tapasananda is at least as responsible for the idea as he himself is and that

Professor Martin E. Marty’s advice that this effort was only possible through one-

pointed concentration sustained him through discouraging times. He knew the

idea was worth enough to brave indifference and incredulity. And when the work

began to form around him, he never claimed credit nor pride of position, but

reminded us all that this was in truth not fit work for a monk at all. We had the

pleasure of saluting his efforts on January 15 at the Baha’i House of Worship on

the occasion of his first move to Boston; as he leaves us again to resume the

contemplative life, we wish him well and we send him our gratitude and

prayers.45

At this juncture, in December 1988, a proposal from Ron Kidd, a committed volunteer

with the centennial, to work for the Council without pay until funds became available,

was accepted by the Board.46

44 Rev. Buchanan appears as one of the signatories of the Declaration towards a Global Ethic in

the context of the Parliament. See Hans Küng and Karl-Joseph Kuschel, editors, A Global Ethic,

The Declaration of the Parliament of the World’s Religions (New York: Continuum, 1993), 37.

45 As reported at the First Annual Meeting held at North Shore Congregation Israel, July 9, 1989,

ACPWR, Box6A, Board of Directors, Folder: Annual Report and Drafts, July 1989. 46

Minutes of CPWR Board meeting December 15, 1988, ACPWR, Box 5, The “Council” (1983-

1989), Folder: December 15, 1988.

160

The decision of the Catholic Church to participate

After the early but unsuccessful attempts by Cardinal Bernardin to support a major

interfaith gathering in Chicago, Catholic involvement in a proposed centennial

Parliament took several different roads. Professor Dennis McCann of the Center for the

Study of Values at DePaul University in Chicago, was drawn to the Parliament idea,

became a regular participant in the early informal planning meetings, and attempted to

engage his university in the Parliament’s emerging organizational network.

On May 17, 1988 I had my first meeting with Swami Sarveshananda of the

Chicago branch of the Vedanta Society, regarding the prospects for a centenary

celebration of the 1893 Parliament of Religions. During that first week of initial

enthusiasm, I met with [De Paul] Dean Meister and with Msgr. Egan, both of

whom seemed to look with favor on DePaul involvement in such a project.47

Eventually, DePaul University became the custodian of the Archives of the Council for a

Parliament of the World’s Religions. McCann’s involvement also opened the door to a

positive academic presence alongside the larger group of interfaith practitioners involved

in the project. Together with Jeffrey Carlson, another member of the faculty at DePaul,

Robert Shreiter, from the Catholic Theological Union of Chicago, and others, McCann

joined scholars of other denominations in bringing the Parliament to the attention of the

American Academy of Religion, which in turn hosted sessions discussing the 1893

Parliament at its annual meetings held in Chicago (1988), New Orleans (1990), and

Kansas City (1991).

But much as McCann’s involvement and DePaul’s support were appreciated, Parliament

advocates knew this was not enough regarding Catholic participation. In her notes on

early Council meetings, Judith Lawrence, a Vedantist volunteer who brought to the

Council her expertise as the secretary of the Dean of the Divinity School at the University

of Chicago, wrote that winning the formal endorsement of the Archdiocese of Chicago

47 McCann to Kay Read and George Hall, June 30, 1988, Box 8B, DePaul University (1988-

1993), Folder: General Correspondence/DePaul Correspondence, August 1988-August 1993.

161

was key to the success of the centennial. This is probably the reason why Lawrence

expressed concern when the administrator of the Council, Ron Kidd, contacted dissident

Catholic theologian Hans Küng and secured his participation in the centennial project as

an advisor.48

Earlier that year, Küng had given a lecture at the Rockefeller Chapel of the

University of Chicago entitled “No World Peace without Peace among the Religions” in

which he addressed his dream of a global ethic. This talk brought Küng to the attention of

the centennial organizers. However, Küng was a controversial Catholic theologian from

Tübingen, reprimanded by the Vatican for his controversial views on doctrinal issues.

Lawrence feared that any involvement of Küng in the centennial might turn the

Archdiocese of Chicago off to the Parliament idea. Hence Lawrence wrote:

Several people in the Chicago wpr [world´s Parliament of religions] group feel we

should be developing broad-spectrum support locally for a gathering in Chicago

and try to be as inclusive as possible and develop the 1993 program for that base.

So when I saw the reply letter from Dr. Küng, which was the first I had heard

about all this [sic], I was very concerned, since our group has not gotten enough

support from all the major denominations here (especially, for example, the

Archdiocese!).

All this makes me even more concerned, because I have since heard that some

denominational leaders in Chicago are concerned that the “theology” of our

project might not accord to their own views and that in that way it might not be

possible for them to support this venture, though they might feel that the idea of

sharing information about the world’s religious traditions and the theme of

brotherhood is perfectly fine.49

Lawrence’s remarks were justified and sharp. It would not always be easy or even

possible for some religious groups, confronted with the idea of working together with

other religions that were so different from their own, to find enough common ground to

set aside those differences. But in spite of Lawrence’s fears, the Archdiocese was not

deterred nor was it absent at this early stage. Sister Joan McGuire, a member of the

48 Kidd to Küng, April 28, 1989, Box7A, Board of Directors Correspondence (1988-1993),

Folder: April-December 1989. 49

Lawrence’s “SUPER-CONFIDENTIAL WPR NOTE,” May 24, 1989, Box7A, Board of

Directors Correspondence (1988-1993), Folder: April-December 1989.

162

Dominican Order with a doctorate in Sacred Theology and the Director of the Office of

Ecumenical and Interreligious Affairs of the Archdiocese of Chicago, was a committed

observer throughout this process. Her ecumenical presence, leadership as a Catholic

religious woman, and ecclesiastical savvy and tactfulness were like a gentle wind that

swept over the waters of these early converging currents. As Cardinal Bernardin’s official

representative on ecumenical and interreligious matters, Sister McGuire was instrumental

in gaining for the centennial project the support not only of the Archdiocese but of the

Council of Religious Leaders of Metropolitan Chicago in which the Cardinal was a major

player. Established through the efforts of Cardinal Bernardin and other prominent

Chicago leaders, this Council was unique in bringing together not only Catholics and

various Protestant denominations but also the Jewish community, all of them interacting

as equal partners.

On December 6, 1988, Baha’i Charles Nolley, chair of the Board of the Council for a

Parliament of the World’s Religions (CPWR), wrote to Cardinal Bernardin informing

him that the CPWR had been asked to make a presentation at the next Executive

Committee meeting of the Council of Religious Leaders of Metropolitan Chicago on

December 21.50

The meeting took place at the Rectory of Holy Name Cathedral in

Chicago. Baha’i Charles Nolley was joined at the meeting by Vedantist Daniel Gómez-

Ibáñez and Zoroastrian Rohinton Rivetna. The fact that these centennial ambassadors

came from Chicago’s minority religions clearly indicated that the Parliament would be a

forum that engaged a multiplicity of religious voices.

Two months after this meeting, Sister McGuire reported to the centennial organizers that

a special committee appointed by the Chicago Council of Religious Leaders consisting of

herself, Rev. William Voelkel, and Dr. Donald Senior, had met to discuss the work of the

Parliament Council and had prepared a proposal which would be discussed at the general

50 Nolley to Bernardin, December 6, 1988, ACPWR, Box9, General Parliament Correspondence,

Folder: December 1988.

163

meeting of the Council of Religious Leaders in March.51

The third member of the

committee, Donald Senior, was also a prominent Catholic. A member of the Passionist

Congregation, he was the president of the Catholic Theological Union, a house of study

for members of different Catholic religious orders in the Chicago region. The special

committee recommended support of the Parliament. Three months later, Rabbi Herman

Schaalman wrote to CPWR chair Chales Nolley on behalf of the Council of Religious

Leaders of Metropolitan Chicago:

The Council of Religious Leaders of Metropolitan Chicago has instructed me to

inform you that it looks with favor on the Council for a Parliament of the World’s

Religions without thereby implying agreement with all of the activities or

theological assumptions that may be forthcoming.

Therefore, the CRLMC will promote the Parliament, encourage sponsorship and

participation by judicatories and organizations, and distribute materials on the

Parliament when appropriate at CRLMC meetings.

Our affirmation of the Council does not include funding by the CRLMC,

agreement on theological assumptions of the Parliament, or the use of CRLMC on

letterhead of Parliament stationery.

We direct the Council for a Parliament of the World’s Religions to seek directly

sponsorship and membership from our judicatories and organizations. The

proposed event which Chicago will host in 1993 has the potential for furthering

racial and ethnic harmony as well as religious understanding among people.

Therefore, the Council of Religious Leaders of Metropolitan Chicago judges the

project worthy of the consideration and support of our members.

We also have appointed Sister Joan McGuire as a liason [sic] between the Council

of Religious Leaders of Metropolitan Chicago and the Council for a Parliament of

the World’s Religions. As liason [sic] Sister McGuire does not speak for the

Council but rather serves to insure communication and mutual understanding

between our two groups.

Your efforts towards the promotion of interreligious harmony deserve our careful

consideration.52

51 Minutes of CPWR Board meeting, February 16, 1989, ACPWR, Box 5, The “Council” (1983-

1989), Folder: Minutes February 16, 1989.

52 Shaalman to Nolley, May 9, 1989, ACPWR, Box 5, The “Council” (1983-1989), Folder:

Council Meeting Correspondence, January-August 1989.

164

The Council of Religious Leaders’ letterhead reveals the breadth of this strategic

endorsement. Thirty well-established religious denominations and theological

organizations comprised the membership of the CRLMC at the time of its endorsement of

the CPWR, including not only Catholic and Orthodox Christianity and various Protestant

denominations but also the Chicago Board of Rabbis. The presence of Jews and Catholics

in Chicago’s Council of Religious Leaders reflects the close relationship between

Cardinal Bernardin and several Jewish constituencies in the Chicago area, a strong liaison

that gave rise to numerous public expressions of mutual respect. Just one month before

the Cardinal died in 1996, he addressed the Jewish community in the afterword to a

Catholic-Jewish related publication:

... I wish to tell you how much I love you and how much the Catholic-Jewish

friendship has meant to me during the years I have been in Chicago. As we both

go forward into the future God has planned for us, I want you to know that the

dialogue has been a blessing for me. After 14 years I truly feel that you have

accepted me as Joseph, your brother.

The Jewish response to the Cardinal’s passing was one of genuine sadness and respect.

An unprecedented gathering took place during the wake of Joseph Cardinal

Bernardin, archbishop of Chicago, on November 19, 1996. Never before, while

the local bishop lay in state, had such a group of prominent Jewish leaders

gathered in a Catholic cathedral to offer words of tribute and respect. Entitled: A

Jewish Farewell, the members of the Catholic-Jewish delegation to Israel led by

Cardinal Bernardin in spring of 1995 spoke before a standing room only

congregation as part of the official program for the Cardinal's wake and funeral.53

Of course, this unique relationship was built not only on respectful dialogue but also on

shared action. The endorsement of the centennial Parliament constitutes a remarkable

example of ecumenical teamwork for an inter-religious cause.

As noted in Rabbi Shaalman’s letter, the CPWR would still have to seek the specific and

individual sponsorship of the CRLMC judicatories and this was no less true of the

53 See Daniel Montalbano, “Cardinal Bernardin: A Blessing for Us All,” SIDIC Periodical XXX,

1 (1997), accessed August 2011,

http://www.notredamedesion.org/en/dialogue_docs.php?a=3b&id=640.

165

Catholic Church. Two weeks after the CRLMC’s endorsement, Daniel Gómez-Ibañez,

the Parliament’s Program Director, accompanied by Rabbi Herbert Bronstein of North

Shore Congregation Israel, visited Cardinal Bernardin.

Gómez-Ibáñez reported that His Eminence had received them very cordially and

that he had asked that a letter be sent which summarize the main points of their

talk. The Cardinal had inquired as to whether the Parliament was being planned as

a Chicago event, to which international visitors might come, or whether it was an

internationally planned event that just happened to choose Chicago as a location.

Mr. Gómez-Ibáñez and Rabbi Bronstein assured the Cardinal that it was the

former... His Eminence also told them that he wishes to keep the ecumenical

offices of the American Council of Bishops and the Vatican informed of

developments, and further that he might know of some persons whom the Council

might approach for possible Board membership.54

If the centennial was to be primarily a local event, oriented to Chicago, then according to

Catholic polity and protocol, the involvement of the Catholic Church would fall within

Cardinal Bernadin’s jurisdiction. Otherwise, approval of Catholic involvement would

necessarily have to come from the National Conference of Catholic Bishops in

Washington DC or even the Vatican. The day after this meeting, Gómez-Ibáñez, aware of

Bernardin’s position and urged by the Council’s need for the Archdiocese’s support,

made a formal plea to the Cardinal.

We ask you to join us in co-sponsoring this work, by bringing to it your ideas,

energy and the good name of the Archdiocese. We want you to help us shape our

plans.

There is some urgency to this request. It is already late to be planning an interfaith

effort of this scope for 1993. Other judicatories in Chicago, whose support also is

essential, are waiting to see how the Archdiocese plans to respond. As we

discussed, the Parliament’s board of directors is being enlarged. We are looking

for suitable nominees to the board and I am sure you can be of great help here.

Finally, we plan two events this year in which we would like to have the

Archdiocese participate: our annual meeting on July 9, and the first public

announcement of our plans –the interfaith service at Rockefeller Chapel on the

afternoon of October 15.

54 Minutes of CPWR Board meeting, May 25, 1989, ACPWR, Box 5, Folder May 25, 1989.

166

If the Archdiocese were able to become a co-sponsor before the July 9 annual

meeting, you or your representative could help elect the new board of directors

and its officers. And your personal participation in the October event, alongside

other religious leaders, would be very important.55

Other members of the Council echoed Gómez-Ibáñez’s concern about securing Catholic

sponsorship of the centennial Parliament. Lawrence wrote, “Frankly, I feel the CPWR

absolutely needs the support of the Archdiocese for one, and there are other

organizations, too, which would surely join in and should join in with the CPWR’s

efforts.”56

But Catholic involvement in the centennial was not only critical for the CPWR

organizers. It was also important to the Catholic Church itself. A lot was at stake in the

Cardinal’s decision. A century had passed since the American archbishops were faced

with a similar issue. The conditions were very different then. The poignant question of

Bishop John Keane –“Can the Church afford not to be there?”- was pregnant with

powerful arguments for the Church to get involved in the 1893 Parliament. Despite

dramatic changes in American Catholicism since the original Parliament, had the same

question been whispered in Cardinal Bernardin’s ear, his response would likely have

been the same as Keane’s. The Catholic Church was no longer defending itself from its

nativist enemies or standing at arm’s length from engagement in the larger American

society. On the contrary, the impact of the Second Vatican Council facilitated a fluid

interaction between Catholic identity and American culture and values. The tension felt

between being “both fully Catholic and unapologetically American” seemed to be over.57

55 Gómez-Ibáñez to Bernardin, May 24, 1989, ACPWR, Box8A, Daniel Gómez-Ibáñez

Correspondence, Folder: 1989-1990.

56 Lawrence to Kenney and Gómez-Ibáñez. June 17, 1989, Box 5, The “Council” (1983-1989),

Folder: Council Meeting Correspondence, January-August 1989. 57

Peter Steinfels and Robert Royal, Introduction to American Catholics, American Culture:

tradition and resistance, ed. Margaret O'Brien Steinfels (Lanham Md.: Rowman & Littlefield,

2004), xii.

167

Jesuit scholar Mark Massa, in his book The American Catholic Revolution, argues that

the 1960s, and particularly –but not exclusively- the Second Vatican Council, changed

the Church forever. Massa highlights Garry Wills’ assertion that “the church’s secret,

hidden away in official teaching, minimized when it could not be ignored, was change.”

Massa affirms that perhaps the most important change brought into the Church by

Vatican II was precisely a growing awareness of change as a basic fact of life, and

specifically of the Catholic Church’s life throughout its long history. Massa also draws

attention to Jesuit historian John O’Malley’s reference to the so-called law of unintended

consequences, according to which “historical events have consequences separate from

(and even sometimes quite opposed to) the intentions of the historical actors who set

those events in motion. These unintended consequences are just as important as intended

ones that did not come to pass and have the same historical validity. Indeed it is possible

that they are considerably more important.” Massa illustrates how both axioms –

unacknowledged but ever-present change and unintended consequences- were fully at

work in different realms of the American Catholic Church during the sixties –before,

during and after the Second Vatican Council. It cannot be denied that changes, and their

consequences, abounded during this decade. Massa focuses on the liturgical changes

within the Latin Rite as a whole, supported in the USA by the careful work of Fr.

Frederick McManus; the controversy unleashed among American Catholics by the papal

encyclical letter Humanae Vitae on contraception; the related suspension of moral

theologian Fr. Charles Curran from his teaching chair at the Catholic University of

America; the renewal of religious life adopted by the Sisters of the Immaculate Heart of

Mary in Los Angeles and ensuing division of the congregation; the acts of civil

disobedience performed by Catholic peace activists against the Vietnam war; and the

endorsement of pluralism by Jesuit theologian Avery Dulles –later made a Cardinal-

through his work about different and non-mutually exclusive models of the Church.58

58 Mark S. Massa, The American Catholic Revolution, How the ‘60s changed the Church forever

(New York: Oxford University Press, 2010), xvi.

168

But as the acts of civil disobedience suggest, the Catholic revolution of the sixties was far

from being limited to the internal Church issues. It made the Church more present and

active than ever in the American public square. As Catholic writers Peter Steinfels and

Robert Royal argue, “by calling for a stance toward modern culture marked by dialogue

at least as much as by combat or rejection, the church lowered the walls of the Catholic

subculture and contributed, intentionally or not, to the assimilation of Catholics into

mainstream American culture.”59

Catholics found themselves so much at home in

America that they felt free to speak out on sensitive issues such as nuclear war and the

economy. The National Conference of Catholic Bishops, rather than turn its back on the

public square, issued consultative pastoral letters on those matters. After all, as Catholic

scholar Chester Gillis states, “American Catholics and their episcopal leaders no longer

thought it incumbent on them to support American policy at all costs. The Catholic

community in America was no longer an exclusively immigrant one seeking confirmation

of its patriotism. It had toed the mark long enough to gain respectability and had risen

above suspicion that it was beholden to a foreign power in Rome. These pastorals

symbolically represent an American Catholic community come of age.”60

It seemed as if the American Catholic Church had been baptized anew in the spirit of

American democracy and this was to have an impact on the exercise and interpretation of

ecclesiastical authority. Catholic historian Patrick Carey describes the spirit of the post-

conciliar age and helpfully compiles a number of initiatives that paralleled, and

sometimes challenged, the traditional authority of the Church’s hierarchy:

The bishops continued to be the most organized voice for the church at the

national level through the yearly meetings of the NCCB. Other in the Church,

however, also became more fully organized at the national level and issued their

own statements that complemented and at times competed with the bishops’

voice: the National Federation of Priests’ Councils (1968), the National Black

Sisters’ Conference (1968), the National Black Catholic Clergy Caucus (1968),

59 Steinfels and Royal, Introduction, xvi.

60 Chester Gillis, Roman Catholicism in America (New York: Columbia University Press, 1999),

114-115.

169

Priests Associated for Religious, Educational, and Social Rights (PADRES,

1969), the Leadership Conference of Women Religious (1971, formerly the

Conference of Major Superiors of Women, 1956), Consortium Perfectae Caritatis

(1971), Las Hermanas (1971). These new national institutions were created to

give voice to special interest groups in the church and were typically American in

their emphases on democratic procedures. These representative organizations

represented the diversity of opinion in the church, and at times their competing

voices paralyzed decision making and made consensus and common actions

impossible except in small groups of very like-minded people. The democratic

élan, the aspirations, and the techniques used in these bodies moreover tended to

disguise the issue of ecclesiastical authority as defined by the council.61

It should not be supposed that the experience of internal Church disagreement was

welcomed by all. Far from it. The same freedom that allowed Catholics to embrace and

criticize American culture was also exercised to criticize the Church. In a sharp contrast

with the restrictions imposed during the anti-modernist struggle at the beginning of the

century that left many Catholics silent and “happy to pray, pay, and obey,”62

Carey

argues that “[p]ost-Vatican II American Catholicism experienced an unprecedented

period of polarization, conflict, and indeed acrimony as different factions in the church

fought with one another over a variety of ecclesiastical, moral, political, and cultural

questions.”63

Beyond the Church mainstream, new developments unfolded in favor of and against the

transformations brought about by Vatican II. On the one hand, the promoters of change

and openness pushed for the Church to move forward on more democratic structures and

procedures, gender equality and the inclusion of sexual minorities. Among these were

groups such as Call to Action, the Women’s Ordination Conference, and Dignity, a

national association for gay and lesbian Catholics. On the other hand, the defenders of the

Church’s tradition questioned or flatly rejected such innovation and change. They

originated the Catholic pro-life movement among moderate conservatives and separatist

61 Patrick Carey, Catholics in America: a history (Westport, Conn.: Praeger, 2004), 122.

62 Gillis, Roman Catholicism in America, 72.

63 Carey, Catholics in America: a history, 122.

170

movements such as the Society of St. Pius X or its American counterpart, the Society of

St. Pius V.

This polarization precipitated an identity crisis among American Catholics. As Catholic

sociologist Michael Cuneo states, “[B]efore long the American church was suffering

from an epidemic of relevance, and the very idea of what it meant to be Catholic had

become endlessly negotiable. In trying to be all things to all people, the American church

seemed to be perfectly willing to dispense with everything that had once made it

distinctive.”64

Catholic scholar Luke Timothy Johnson goes further. He argues that “it

was at this moment that American Catholicism began to become, in effect, the largest

mainline Protestant denomination in the country, precisely in its loss of a single vision

and a single voice.”65

In the midst of this internally divisive controversy, the Church was at once engaged in the

pro-life war against pro-choice secular America and in its own internal battles related to

its own identity. Furthermore, the Church was also beginning to face what was to become

a crushing burden of scandal as the news of sexual abuse by clergy became a major

theme in North American media. In this maelstrom, challenges posed by religious

pluralism in America and the danger of religious indifferentism were pushed into the

background. With the Church hierarchy focused elsewhere, mainstream Catholics were

more engaged than ever not just with other Christians, but with followers of other

religions. In a more and more religiously pluralist America, non-Catholics were fellow

citizens, co-workers, classmates, neighbors, friends, and sometimes relatives. This was

particularly evident in large metropolitan areas like Chicago, the largest Roman Catholic

archdiocese in the country and a city where all religions of the world seemed to have

found a home.

64 Michael W. Cuneo, The Smoke of Satan (New York: Oxford University Press, 1997), 4.

65 Luke Timothy Johnson, “Abortion, Sexuality, and Catholicism’s Public Presence,” in American

Catholics, American Culture: tradition and resistance, ed. Margaret O'Brien Steinfels (Lanham

Md.: Rowman & Littlefield, 2004), 35.

171

Cardinal Bernardin, a leader in interfaith dialogue, had enough reasons to endorse the

centennial Parliament. He had even tried to organize a similar centennial celebration

during his early years in Chicago. The issue at stake was whether he would be willing to

endorse a project not led by the Catholic Church but by several religious minorities, most

non-Christian, and whether the Archdiocese of Chicago would be willing to partner with

those groups in organizing a new parliament of religions. A century earlier the American

Catholic Archbishops decided that the Catholic Church could not afford to be left out of

the first Parliament of Religions, nor could the original Parliament afford the absence of

the Catholic Church.

A similar perception developed around the centennial. The difference with the centennial

Parliament was that the Catholic Church, despite its internal turmoil, was the single

largest and most powerful religious organization in Chicago and a main religious player

in the country at large. From this position of relevance and public presence, both the

Church and the Parliament’s organizing committee could not afford to let a centennial

Parliament occur without the Catholic Church being fully present and engaged.

On June 21, 1989 Cardinal Bernardin answered Gómez-Ibáñez’s letter of four weeks

earlier. Bernardin announced the Archdiocese of Chicago would become a co-sponsor of

the centennial Parliament and he enclosed a signed co-sponsorship form. The Cardinal

also appointed the Rev. Thomas Baima, a priest of the Archdiocese of Chicago who held

the position of Director of the Office of Non-Christian Relations in the Archdiocesan

Curia, as a nominee for Board membership. With the appointment of Fr. Baima, the

Cardinal would rest assured that the most orthodox interests of the Catholic Church

would be safeguarded in the pluralistic environment of the Parliament Council. A staunch

defender of Catholic doctrinal orthodoxy and pastoral orthopraxis, Fr. Baima originally

was not in favor of a parliament of religions. However, his commitment to the mission

entrusted to him as the official representative of the Cardinal soon translated into support

for the Parliament. Throughout the complex planning process with a myriad of sensitive

issues at stake, Fr. Baima’s ecumenical spirit took hold and he became a key player and a

trusted partner on the Council. Sister Joan McGuire, who soon would be called away to

172

take on important leadership projects within her religious order, was nominated by the

Cardinal as a Council’s advisor. A third name was also proposed by the Cardinal, Dr.

Clarisse Croteau-Chonka, who served as Consultant for Planning and Technology at the

Archdiocesan Office for Religious Education and had previously attended several

meetings of the Council. She was nominated a member of the Program Committee.66

With these formal Catholic appointments, the Cardinal indicated how seriously he took

the involvement of the Archdiocese in the Parliament organization.

The awaited Catholic involvement was warmly welcomed. When the Cardinal’s letter

was read to the Council’s Board by Chair Charles Nolley, the “news was greeted with a

hearty round of applause by everyone.”67

Finally, fifteen months after the first Council meeting, the Catholic Church was fully

involved as a partner in planning the event. However, the core Council leadership

continued to be held by the pioneers, mostly adherents of minority religious groups in

Chicago. On July 9, 1989, during its first annual general meeting, the Council voted on

the admission of new Board officers. While the name of Fr. Baima was included in the

ballots for Chair, Vice-Chair, and Secretary of the Council, he was then still an

unfamiliar face. While Fr. Baima was welcomed on the Council, Zoroastrian Rohinton

Rivetna and Religion and Science scholar David Breed remained in their positions as

Vice-Chair and Treasurer respectively, and Vedantist Daniel Gómez-Ibáñez and Baha’i

Leilani Smith were appointed as Chair and Secretary respectively. Buddhist Ron Kidd

continued as the Council’s administrator with deferred pay.

At this juncture the Council still only counted eighteen official co-sponsoring

organizations. Securing the formal support of the Council of Religious Leaders of

Metropolitan Chicago and the official sponsorship of the Catholic Church represented a

66 Bernardin to Gómez-Ibáñez, June 21, 1989, ACPWR, Box9, General Parliament

Correspondence, Folder: June 1989, 1 of 2.

67 Minutes of Board Meeting, June 22, 1989, ACPWR, Box 5, The “Council” (1983-1989),

Folder: Minutes June 22 1989.

173

solid start. However, despite these encouraging developments, there were numerous

challenges ahead that would make it uncertain whether the intended centennial

Parliament would ever crystallize.

“Inexperienced, underfunded, understaffed and running out of time”

Following its first annual general meeting, the Council began preparing a ceremonial

event conceived as the inauguration of the centennial activities. The event was held at the

Rockefeller chapel of the University of Chicago on November 4, 1989. Among the

speeches delivered, the one offered by Dr. Paulos Mar Gregorios –Metropolitan of Delhi

for the Orthodox Syrian Church of the East and President for Asia of the World Council

of Churches-stood out. He took advantage of this solemn occasion to propose a vision for

the Parliament.

What is before us is a rich, deep, penetrating respectful understanding of each

other’s religions. Not a common universal religion which puts everything into one

pot; we do not want a religion which unites all religions. [Instead,] a Global

Concourse of Religions –a flowing together, a running together- of all religions…

without losing their identity, but in relation to each other, with mutual respect, and

moving toward certain specific goals.68

Gregorios’ vision framed the centennial Parliament within the sound understanding of

interfaith relations commonly accepted and endorsed by the big historic players in the

interfaith movement. Instead of intending to create a supra religion through the fusion of

the individual religions, the goal was to affirm the identity and specificity of every

religion involved in the process of interfaith dialogue.

In addition to this solemn inauguration, several small and local interfaith conferences

were organized on the so-called “critical issues” related to social and ecological justice.

However, despite these good initiatives, the next four years would prove a thorny path

through the planning process surrounded by a justified lack of credibility in the

68 Paulos Mar Gregorios, “The Vision Beckons.” Inaugural speech at the kick-off centennial

event, November 4, 1989, in A Sourcebook for the Community of Religions, ed. Joel Beverluis in

(Chicago: Council for a Parliament of the World’s Religions, 1993), 15.

174

centennial’s feasibility. This skepticism was clearly articulated in the negative response

from Chicago’s Northwestern University to the Council’s proposal to hold the centennial

in the university premises. The university saw little likelihood that the Parliament could

come together if it was led by a Council regarded as “inexperienced, underfunded,

understaffed and running out of time.” Northwestern’s discouraging prediction of failure

was actually an objective evaluation of the Council’s situation.69

Organizing an event that, although officially identified as local, was global in its

proposed content and planned to bring together world religious leaders like the Dalai

Lama was an enterprise for which the well-intentioned pioneers had neither previous

experience nor proven expertise. Furthermore, the new Chair of the Board and future

Executive Director of the Council, Daniel Gómez-Ibáñez, was neither a religious

professional nor an internationally recognized leader in any ecumenical and interfaith

organization. Raised in a religiously indifferent household, he earned a PhD in

geography, lectured on geography for a time, and, sensitive to issues of corporate social

responsibility, he eventually became an executive with Wisconsin Light and Power, Co.70

His association with the Vedanta Society brought him into contact with the Parliament

Centennial project.

However, any lack of ecumenical, “institutional savvy” in Gómez-Ibáñez71

was

compensated for by his excellent communication and organizational skills, a genuine

passion for the Parliament project, and his time availability and total commitment to

making the Parliament happen. It has been argued in retrospect that without the steady

69 Gómez-Ibáñez to the Board, October 8, 1991, ACPWR, Box7A, Board of Directors

Correspondence, Folder: January-October 1991.

70 Delegate Biographies, ACPWR, Box 34A, Delegate Biographies, Folder: G-L.

71 Richard Seager reports that the “absence of mainstream Protestants [in the centennial] was

attributed to the lack of institutional savvy on the part of the centennial organizers.” Seager’s

remarks do not allude to Gómez-Ibáñez specifically but to the members of the Council in general.

See Richard Seager, “The Two Parliaments, the 1893 Original and the Centennial of 1993: A

Historian’s View,” in The Community of Religions, Voices and Images of the Parliament of the

World’s Religions, ed. Wayne Teasdale and George Cairns (New York: Continuum, 1999), 30.

175

efforts of Gómez-Ibáñez the 1993 Parliament of Religions in Chicago would not have

happened.72

Perhaps the most significant challenge facing Gómez-Ibáñez and the Council was

defining a clear vision for the Parliament centennial. There was a strong inclination to

make the centennial a genuinely religious event with clear references to the impact of

religion in all areas of social, political, and economic spheres. However, Gómez-Ibáñez

working with Dr. Gerald Barney, the director of the Washington-based Institute of 21st

Century Studies, brought about a shift of focus of the Parliament objectives into what

would eventually be formulated as the United Nations Millennium Development Goals.

For the integration of the millennium goals within an interfaith framework in the context

of a centennial Parliament, Gómez-Ibáñez counted on the advice and support of Jim

Kenney. Growing up Catholic, Kenney pursued doctoral studies on comparative religions

and became chair of the Department of Religious Studies at Barat College in Lake Forest,

IL. He was also the director of Common Ground, a grassroots organization that focused

on the implications of religions for the human experience. Kenney served as the program

director of the Council.73

In addition to the challenge of finding a unifying vision, there were also problems with

the so-called “bottom line,” the budget. Lack of funds made it impossible to keep Ron

Kidd as administrator and led to the closing of the Parliament’s first office, a space

donated by Block Carus, a relative of Paul Carus, one of the leading participants in the

1893 Parliament. For several months, Gómez-Ibáñez ran the Council out of his own

72 Interview to Hamid Ahmed in “Interfaith Dialogue at the 1893 and 1993 Parliaments of the

World's Religions,” by Carroll Fisher (PhD diss., The Union Institute and University, 2001),

Dissertation Abstracts International; 2001, Vol. 61 Issue 12, 81.

73 Gómez-Ibáñez aspired to link the Parliament to UNESCO, and he met with leaders of the

organization for this purpose, which never crystallized. See Gómez to Dr. Federico Mayor-

Zaragoza-UNESCO, January 3, 1993, ACPWR, Box8A, Daniel Gómez-Ibáñez Correspondence,

Folder: January February 1993.

176

home in Cambridge, Wisconsin. He succeeded in obtaining a leave of absence from

Wisconsin Light and Power, which allowed him to devote all his time and energy to the

Parliament project. He also managed to switch positions from Chair of the Board to

Executive Director of the Council as a result of an offer from Wisconsin Light and Power

to donate his salary to the Council for a limited transition period. Gómez-Ibáñez was

succeeded as chair of the Board by Rev. David Ramage, the President of McCormick

Presbyterian Seminary of Chicago, who lent his prestige to the Parliament project, thus

increasing its credibility.

As soon as Gómez-Ibáñez was released from his corporate duties and was able to devote

himself exclusively to the centennial project, important advances began to take place. He

was able to secure pledges of financial support from the Rockefellers and from the

Templeton Foundation. As a result of this dramatic shift in the financial prospects of the

Parliament project, Gómez-Ibáñez opened an office in downtown Chicago, hired staff,

and was eventually able to sign a contract with the Palmer House to hold the Parliament

there. Throughout this process, he also continued to count on the generous volunteer

work of the early pioneers of the centennial project. At the same time, he re-connected

with Marcus Braybrooke and the global plans to declare 1993 a year of interfaith

understanding, bringing the Chicago plans to the international scene, particularly through

trips to Europe and India. His efforts to make the centennial Parliament a truly global

event were especially crowned when Cardinal Bernardin informed the Council that the

Vatican would send a delegate to the centennial. However, while the list of co-sponsors

grew both in number and diversity, as the Parliament launch drew nearer, there was still

great uncertainty about the final outcome. Fr. Thomas Baima reports that “prospects

looked bleak 80 days before the event when CPWR had rented the entire Palmer House

Hilton and had only 1200 paid registrations.”74

74 Thomas Baima, “White Paper on the Role of the Archdiocese of Chicago in the Parliament of

the World's Religions,” confided to the writer by the Office of Ecumenical and Interfaith Affairs

of the Archdiocese of Chicago, n-d, 7.

177

Through its decision to embark on the centennial Parliament project the Catholic Church

was not only sharing in the historical significance of the centennial commemoration but

also taking the risks that such complex event entailed. However, some of these risks

would soon turn out into great opportunities of interfaith dialogue and learning.

178

“The most diverse celebration in history”

As word spread that a centennial Parliament of Religions was being planed, great

enthusiasm erupted across the world: a solitary monk from “Christ in the River

Hermitage” in Australia; a scientist of religion in India who argued for a new discipline

called “spiritometry”; agents on economic and social development from Sri Lanka and

Italy; religious congress experts from Belgium; descendants of the pastor composer of

Iceland’s national anthem who attended the 1893 Parliament; a Hindu-Catholic guru from

Peru; a Caribbean theosophist inquiring about simultaneous translation into Spanish of

the Parliament sessions; several incarcerated inmates in American jails; and an elderly

retired philosophy professor who exclaimed “I have waited 55 years to see the Parliament

of Religions!” All were among the hundreds of interested people who contacted the

Council in Chicago seeking information about the proposed gathering in the months prior

to the Centennial.1

1 Fr. Douglas Conlan, Christ in the River Hermitage, Australia, to Fr. Julian VonDuerbeck, OSB,

Saint Propopius Abbey, Lisle, Illinois, January 16, 1993, ACPWR, Box 11, General Parliament

Correspondence, Folder: January 1993; Sr. Shreenivas, Clinic International Institute of Polypathy,

Patna, India, to Daniel Gómez-Ibáñez, May 7, 1993, ACPWR, Box8A, Daniel Gómez-Ibáñez

Correspondence, Folder: May 1993; Hewage Jayasena, Society for International Development

SID-Sri Lanka, to Robert Cassani, Society for International Development SID Headquarters,

Palazzo Civilta del Lavoro, Rome, Italy, February 15, 1993, ACPWR, Box8A, Folder: January-

February 1993; Anthony J. N. Judge, Union of International Associations, Bruxelles, Belgium, to

Council for a Parliament of the World Religions, November 5, 1992, ACPWR, Box 11, Folder:

September-December 1992; Sigurdur Arni Thordarson, Selfoss, Iceland, to Daniel Gómez-

Ibáñez, August 25, 1992, ACPWR, Box8A, Folder: August 1992; Angel Ledesma Ginatta,

Asociación Escuela de Autorealización, Guayaquil, Ecuador, to Daniel Gómez-Ibáñez, April 16,

1993, ACPWR, Box8A, Folder: April 1993; Ms. Ondina Durán, President of the Sociedad

Teosófica, Dominican Republic, to CPWR, July 26, 1993, ACPWR, Box 12A, Folder: June-July

1993; Jeff Zachary, Indiana Department of Correction, to CPWR, May 28, 1992, ACPWR, Box

11, Folder: May-August 1992; Daniel Gómez-Ibáñez to Mr. R. J. Perry, Indiana Department of

Correction, n-d, ACPWR, Box8A, Folder: October-November 1992; Jack L. Henry Jr.,

incarcerated student of the Arts, to CPWR, April 19, 1993, ACPWR, Box8B, Folder: Letters of

Inquiry, Oct 92-May 93; Archie J. Bahm, Professor of Philosophy Emeritus, University of New

Mexico, Albuquerque, to Daniel Gómez-Ibáñez, December 11, 1991, ACPWR, Box 8A, Folder:

December 1991.

179

The Council was also casting the net as wide as possible by sending letters of invitation

to Mother Theresa of Calcutta, Russian ex-premier Michael Gorvachev, Vice-President

Al Gore, First Lady Hilary Clinton and other prominent individuals.2 As the date of the

event approached, any uncertainty surrounding the actual shape and size of the

Centennial gathering rapidly vanished. Just a few weeks before the opening day,

registration reached its maximum. The organizers declared the event sold out “under

pressure from the local fire department.”3 After much effort, the centennial Parliament

was finally about to happen.

In addition to the Chicago event, other celebrations were organized in different parts of

the world. Major commemorations of the 1893 Parliament took place in Delhi and other

Indian cities. Vedantists performed special celebrations throughout India and at their

centers in various locations worldwide,4 and Zoroastrians organized especial worship

services named jashans “in a chain of prayers encircling the globe starting with Australia,

India and Pakistan, UK, and thence the USA and Canada, as Zarthustis gathered in their

Agiaries, Halls and Darbe Mehrs to commemorate the Parliament of the World’s

Religions.”5 A significant congress, entitled “Religious People Meeting Together, Sarva-

Dharma-Sammelana,” organized by the global interfaith organizations, took place in

2 Daniel Gómez-Ibáñez with Mother Teresa on the phone, August 17, 1993, in Parliament of the

World´s Religions Program Catalogue (Chicago: Council for a Parliament of the World´s

Religions, 1993), 8; Daniel Gómez-Ibáñez to Mikhail Gorbachev, May 12, 1992, ACPWR,

Box8A, Daniel Gómez-Ibáñez Correspondence, Folder: May 1992; on Hillary Clinton and Al

Gore see Executive Committee meeting, August 3, 1993, ACPWR, Box14A, Executive

Committee, Folder: ExCom Agenda and Minutes July – August 1993. 3 Anthony Judge, “Learnings for the Future of Inter-Faith Dialogue. Part I: Questions arising from

the Parliament of the World´s Religions, Chicago, 1993,” Transnational Associations, 6 (1993):

347.

4 Swami Lokeswarananda, Swami Vivekananda and the World’s Parliament of Religions in

Chicago, 1893, Centenary Celebrations 11 Sept. 1993 to 27 Sept 1994, Programme and Appeal

(Calcutta: Ramakrishna Mission, 1992), Archives of the Graduate Theological Union, Berkeley,

California (AGTU), Bede Griffiths Collection, Box 4:15, Folder: Misc. Papers, Parliament of

Religions, In Memory of Bede Griffiths.

5 Rohinton Rivetna, “Jashans around the world,” Fezana Journal, 6, 4, Winter (1993): 36.

180

Bangalore, India, shortly before the Chicago Parliament, and another important

commemoration was organized in Tokyo, Japan. Some global interfaith leaders, such as

Rev. Marcus Braybrooke of the World Congress of Faiths of Oxford, England,

circumnavigated the planet in just a few weeks in order to take part in all the major

celebrations.6 But the final destination of interfaith globetrotters like Braybrooke and

religious pilgrims and seekers from different parts of the world was Chicago, where the

ultimate centennial commemoration was to take place. As happened a hundred years

earlier, Chicago once again became the navel of the religious universe through the

centennial Parliament. The scope of its program, the tensions it generated, the diversity of

its participants, but above all the extent of its inclusivity, were about to make the 1993

Parliament of Religions “the most diverse celebration in history.”7

The Parliament of the World’s Religions

Eleven years after that first documented meeting of interested interfaith activists in the

home of Mr. Dubocq on Chicago’s 56th

Street, the Palmer House in downtown Chicago

was ready to host the Parliament of the World’s Religions. On Saturday, October 28,

1993 hundreds of registrants flooded the halls of the Palmer House to take part in the

opening plenary of the centennial Parliament while “outside, fundamentalist Christians

handed out tracts on hell and paradise.”8

The halls of the Palmer House are a swirl of color. Saffron-robbed Buddhist

monks mingle with dark-suited Protestant clergy; Native Americans in ceremonial

dress stand alongside turbaned Sikhs. A Catholic cardinal compliments a Pagan

from the Earth Spirit Community on his choice of color in robes, and he laughs –

they both wear the same shade of crimson. As the opening procession of the

Parliament of the World’s Religions unfurls in Chicago this August,

6 Marcus Braybrooke, Faith and Interfaith in a Global Age (Grand Rapids, MI: CoNexus, 1998),

34-40.

7 Wayne Teasdale and George Cairns, editors, The Community of Religions, Voices and Images of

the Parliament of the World’s Religions (New York: Continuum, 1999), 12.

8 Dana Rodenbaugh, “Unique Parliament of Religions celebrates diversity,” National Catholic

Reporter, 29:4 (Sept 10, 1993), accessed July 4, 2012, ProQuest (ID 215341970).

181

representatives of dozens of spiritual traditions come together for the first time in

a century – Witches and Pagans among them.9

While it was not really the first time in a century that a Parliament met in Chicago –due

to the overlooked Parliament of 1933- and the reference to a Catholic cardinal comparing

attires with other religious leaders is certainly a graceful literary resource of the writer’s

imagination, the observer is accurate in the fact that Cardinal Bernardin not only was

present for the opening ceremonies of the 1993 Parliament but led the inaugural

procession of dignitaries, co-sponsors, and host committees.10

He was accompanied in

the procession by other Catholic representatives from the Monastic Interreligious

Dialogue, the Focolare Movement, DePaul University, Catholic Theological Union, St.

Isidore Church and St. John De La Salle Church. Moreover, Benedictine monks Fr. Julian

von Düerbeck and Brother Gregory Perron of St. Procopius Abbey in Lisle, Illinois,

served as the Processional Marshal and an Attending Marshall respectively.11

Another

prominent Catholic was among the religious leaders that presided over the overture of the

centennial, James Yellowbank, a Winnebago Indian, aboriginal activist and lecturer, and

director of the Aniwim Center for Native American Catholics of Chicago.12

But perhaps

the most striking feature of this opening ceremony was the presence of new religious

movements, particularly those embracing the tenets of ancient so-called pagan religious

traditions. A direct witness, Vedantist David Nelson, relates that “the singing swelled

9 Sarah Stockwell, “Pagans at the Parliament of the World’s Religions,” Tides: A Journal of

Wicca and NeoPagan Spirituality, Samhain/Yule, 2, 1 (1993): 18.

10 Carroll Fisher, “Interfaith Dialogue at the 1893 and 1993 Parliaments of the World's

Religions,” (PhD diss., The Union Institute and University, 2001), Dissertation Abstracts

International; 2001, Vol. 61 Issue 12, 86.

11 Hans Küng and Karl-Joseph Kuschel , editors, A Global Ethic, The Declaration of the

Parliament of the World’s Religions (New York: Continuum, 1993), 113. 116-117. For more on

the procession, see Julian Von Duerbeck, “Impressions of the ´93 Parliament Procession,” Sisters

Today, 67, May (1995): 178-180.

12 Thomas Baima, “White Paper on the Role of the Archdiocese of Chicago in the Parliament of

the World’s Religions,” confided to the writer by the Office of Ecumenical and Interfaith Affairs

of the Archdiocese of Chicago, n-d, 8.

182

throughout the hall while the Reverend Baroness Cara-Marguerite Drusilla, Priestess

Hierophant of the Lyceum of Venus [apparently a former Catholic nun], dressed as

Nefertiti, glided by, serenely aware of the titters and muffled comments in the nearby Red

Lacquer Ballroom…”13

Once the opening procession was over, the honorary chairs of the Parliament –Chicago

Mayor Richard M. Daley, who happened to be an Irish Catholic, and Illinois Governor

Jim Edgar- greeted the assembly, after which executive director Dr. Daniel Gómez

Ibáñez welcomed the participants and Chair of the Board Dr. David Ramage solemnly

declared the Parliament open. One after another, invocations and blessings were offered

by representatives of the many religious traditions gathered at the event. Cardinal

Bernardin’s invocation was noted by Vedantist Nelson as follows:

We will pray, listen, dream, plan, challenge ourselves and others. O God, creator

and sustainer of life… blessed are you who have brought us together from

throughout the world. Despite the efforts of our predecessors, our world still

suffers. Grant us wisdom, openness and willingness to listen to one another and

faith to foster love and respect for all peoples.14

With these words and many other similar expressions, the Parliament of the World’s

Religions was inaugurated. By the time of the opening, the Parliament counted 198 co-

sponsors representing a variety of Baha’is, Buddhists, Christians, Hindus, Jains, Jews,

Muslims, Neo-Pagans, Sikhs, Taoists, Unitarian Universalists, Wiccans, and

Zoroastrians. Furthermore, among the co-sponsors there were academic institutions, civic

organizations, ecumenical and interfaith networks, and publishing houses. It is important

to note that 180 out of these co-sponsoring organizations had American addresses. The

eighteen remaining were located in Bangladesh, Canada, France, Germany, Hong Kong,

India, Ireland, Korea, Malaysia, Saudi Arabia, Sri Lanka, Switzerland, Thailand, Uganda

13 David Nelson, “Notes and Reflections on the Parliament of the World’s Religions, 1993.”

Printed privately in an edition of 50 copies on the first day of Navaratri, 15 October 1993.

Revised edition, August 1994, ACPWR, Box 58, Folder David Nelson “Notes and Reflections on

the Parliament of the World’s Religions, 1993,” 4. 14

David Nelson, “Notes and Reflections on the Parliament of the World’s Religions, 1993,” 4.

183

and the United Kingdom. A unique presence among the co-sponsors were six separate

Humanist bodies, giving agnostics and atheists a voice at the gathering.

In sharp contrast with the attendance-related concerns raised just a few weeks prior to the

event, the number of participants was much higher than expected. There were

approximately 8,100 registrations and 6,500 attendees. The event was amply covered by

the media, with 857 representatives from the press. In addition to domestic media, there

were press correspondents from Australia, Japan, Hong Kong, India, Germany, England,

and Canada. As was expected, 57% of participants were from the United States, with all

states represented except Alaska. Illinois, California, and New York were the most

widely represented. The remaining 43% came from 55 countries. Canadian participation

comprised 2% with registrants from all ten provinces. Not surprisingly, Christians

constituted the largest faith represented, followed in descending order by Hindus,

Buddhists, Baha’is and Muslims. This extraordinary display of diversity throughout the

unfolding Parliament was eloquentlly described by Rabbi Howard Sulkin, President of

Spertus College of Judaica in Chicago, in a sermon given on Yom Kippur morning at the

Chicago Sinai Congregation, just two weeks after the Parliament’s conclusion:

Sit back. Close your eyes… but not too tightly, and activate all your senses: your

sense of sight, of sound, of smell, of taste, and of touch.

See thousands of people in a rainbow of skin-tones, wearing saffron robes and

mantles of white, saris and gowns, turbans and yarmulkes, headdresses of feathers

and crowns of the Pharaohs, see Neruh-jackets and western dress.

See Moslems and Jews, Hindus and Sikhs, Catholics and Protestants, Secularists

and neo-Pagans, Buddhists and Shintos, Orthodox and Zoroastrians. Watch these

people as they listen and search, teach and learn, enter into conflict and learn to

dialogue.

Arrive very early in the morning, and see Jews in tefillin, Muslims kneeling on

prayer rugs, Buddhists in meditation, hundreds on the floor of the hotel lobby in

yoga positions, and still other hundreds in the grand ballroom practicing tai-chi, as

if captured by slow-motion picture camera.

Smell curry and pizza, incense and candles, flowers and herbs. Hear chanting and

prayer, bells and gongs and silence, probing questions and tentative answers, long

impassioned speeches of words and brief gentle phrases of wisdom.

184

Shake hands with people of deep faith, and those who are questioning or who

have lost their faith, with persons of every race and creed, from every continent in

the world. Meet secretaries and teachers, housewives and doctors, priests and

rabbis, ministers and swamis, and the Dalai Lama.

Go forward to the past and back to the future. Welcome to the 1993 Parliament of

Religions.15

Rabbi Sulkin spoke with the authority not only of being a direct witness and organizer of

the Parliament but also of being among the earliest pioneers of the centennial idea. He

was among the ten guests who attended the first documented centennial planning meeting

eleven years earlier at the home of Dr. Dubocq in 1982.16

An almost totally inclusive program

Over the course of nine days, from Saturday, August 28 to Sunday, September 5,

registered participants had access to a rich and complex program. Program Director Sarah

Berstein reported that “over a period of eleven months, the program staff compiled a

monstrous database containing over 1300 detailed program proposals, submitted by

fifteen major faith traditions and two hundred co-sponsors.”17

Jim Kenney, Chair of the

Program Committee and main architect of the program, stated as the theme of the

Parliament’s program “that the world’s religions should gather to proclaim their

respective visions, to acknowledge each other, and to celebrate together the values they

share and their common commitment to addressing the critical issues confronting human

kind at the threshold of the 21st century.”

18 This overarching theme was actualized in six

15 Howard A. Sulkin, “Impressions from the Parliament,” CPWR Journal, Nov. 1993, in

ACPWR, Box 58, Responses to Parliament, Folder: Sulkin.

16 List of attendees at meeting on November 21, 1982 at the residence of Dr. Dubocq, ACPWR,

Box9, General Parliament Correspondence, Folder: January-February 1988.

17 Barbara Berstein, “A Parliament of the People,” in The Community of Religions, ed. Teasdale

and Cairns, 48.

18 Jim Kenney, “The Parliament Experience: 1993 and Beyond” in The Community of Religions,

ed. Teasdale and Cairns, 136.

185

focus areas: Earth-Science-Technology, Social Challenge, Community and Culture,

Spirituality, Religions of the World, and Body and Mind.

Fr. Thomas Baima used the image of concentric circles to describe the organization of the

Parliament’s vast and varied program. “At the center was the Parliament Assembly, an

invitation-only gathering of about 250 persons drawn from among the religious and

spiritual leadership around the world. This core gathering would address the official

document of the parliament, Toward a Global Ethic, An Initial Declaration,” 19

the

original version of which was drafted by Catholic theologian Hans Küng. The next circle

was the Plenary sessions, a series of gatherings described by Berstein as nine “full-scale

productions” on relevant topics of the Parliament and expected to be attended by

everyone, since no other activities were planned for the times when they were scheduled.

The third circle of programming included the Major Presentations, a series of 175

lectures delivered by distinguished representatives of the participating religious

traditions. The forth circle consisted of 454 seminars and lectures together with special

interest symposia on the academy, pluralism, science, violence, business, and the media,

along with artistic performances, such as The Festival of Sacred Performing Arts, “a five-

hour global extravaganza.” Berstein referred to the total program as “an intricate maze of

over 800 addresses and seminars,” comprised in a 152-page program catalogue, in which

over 40 sessions were available concurrently at any given time.20

Baima identified the

vendor area, also known as the “county fair of religions,” as a fifth circle, followed by the

final circle: the “parliament of the people,” an event held during lunch hour over four

days with the purpose of establishing communication among ordinary participants, whom

Berstein called the “little people” of the Parliament.21

Program Chair Jim Kenney referred to the comprehensive character of the Parliament

program “as though the curriculum of a great university ha[d] been comprised into the

19 Baima, “White Paper,” 8.

20 The image of a maze is quite appropriate since the program book has no index of any kind.

21 See Berstein, “A Parliament of the People,” 48, and Baima, “White Paper,” 8.

186

space of a single week.”22

And Kenney’s analogy corresponded to the college-like

experience related by a Parliament participant:

The opening day at the Parliament of the World’s Religions was like the first day

at college, only more confusing. My initial fear was assuaged when I discovered

(unlike another member of my party) that I had successfully registered. I was sure

of this when, after standing in a long line amidst the dense hubbub of the other

“students,” and after stuttering my name to the official behind the computer, I was

given a name tag with my identifying organization, “Vedanta Society NYC.”

Along with this I.D. I was presented with a daunting catalogue of “courses.”

Now I was clearly out of my league. This was like an open graduate university

with no one telling me where to go or what classes to take. And I had eight days

to get an education. Many professors were famous, who taught courses like “The

Ontological Foundation of Gender Equality” or “Religion in the Emerging Era of

Electronic Equality” and “Contemplative Dwelling I: Dwelling Process Failure,

Planetary Crisis, Underlying Causes and Alternative Dwelling Design.” The worst

part was they seemed to be all coinciding, and overlapping, and all equally

important.

I decided to be like a leaf in the stream and be bumped from place to place.

Sometimes I wandered the halls with catalogue in hand peeking into six or seven

“classrooms” until I felt a pull to enter. Then I floated in and settled into this pool

for a little while. I would feel another pull, float out again and repeat the process.

If two conflicting truths can co-exist, this was certainly a verification!23

If the program seemed rather overwhelming to most, the great diversity of religions

represented was even more daunting. The liberal mindedness of Daniel Gómez-Ibáñez

and Jim Kenney opened the doors wide open to welcome everybody. The protocol was

“to reach out as broad as possible. All who responded would be invited.”24

22 The Parliament of the World’s Religions Program Catalogue (PWRPC) (Chicago: Council for a

Parliament of the World´s Religions, 1993), 12.

23 Stephen Roylance, “Getting An Education: Buddhism at the Parliament,” Vedanta Free Press,

a journal for growth dialogue and outreach, Special Parliament Issue, 2, 3, Winter (1993-1994):

27. 24

Kenney, “The Parliament experience,” in The Community of Religions, ed. Teasdale and

Cairns, 136. While this was the official policy of the Parliament organizers, there were a few

groups who were not allowed to become co-sponsors of the Parliament centennial. These

exceptions are explained later in this section.

187

A prominent presence in the Parliament was that of the Aboriginal religions. Neglected

and excluded from the 1893 Parliament, they were very visible and outspoken throughout

the centennial Parliament.25

A highlight of the opening ceremony was the blessings from

the four directions and the center led by representatives of the Onodaga, Navajo, Hopi,

Crow, and Patowatomi nations. There were also numerous sessions on various

indigenous issues, not only from North America but also from Latin America and Africa.

A notable example was the inclusion in the program of His Imperishable Glory, Bambi

Baaba of Uganda, Intra-Being Ansenserenist and Guardian-Inventor of Ansenserenica, an

African Native esoteric tradition.26

No less prominent was the presence of several Neo-Pagan and Wiccan groups, also very

visible from the start of the event. Among these Witch and Goddess oriented groups were

The Covenant of the Goddess, the Fellowship of Isis (FOI), the EarthSpirit Community,

the Lyceum of Venus of Healing (a Fellowship of Isis center), and the Circle Sanctuary.

Their inclusion in the Parliament was interpreted by some as a sort of a pagan coming of

age: “I believe,” wrote one follower of Wicca, “that Wiccan participation in the 1993

Parliament of the World’s Religions was the most important event in our history since the

publication of Witchcraft Today (by Gerald Gardner).”27

They overcame municipal

obstacles to hold a Full Moon ritual at a Chicago public park and were pleasantly

surprised by the welcoming attitude of many Parliament participants to their contribution

to the Parliament program. “Imagine our surprise when our presentations had to be

moved to larger rooms because of space considerations… I had thought that being around

25 For the major cornerstones of American Indian history and religion, see Joel W. Martin, The

land looks after us: a history of Native American religion (Oxford; New York: Oxford University

Press, 2001).

26 PWRPC, 59. Zenith Gold Publishers carries publications in Luganda and English of the

speeches of Bambi Baamba and the Ansenserenist tradition, accessed February 2012,

http://zenithgoldpublishers.com/englishpublications01.aspx.

27 Michael Thron, “Report from the Parliament of World Religions: NeoPaganism Comes of

Age?” Tides: A Journal of Wicca and NeoPagan Spirituality, Samhain/Yule, 2, 1 (1993): 17.

188

so many ‘conservative-mainstream-religionists,’ I would have to defend my religion and

myself. Not so!”28

Another group absent at the 1893 Parliament, the Mormons, was granted full

participation and religious recognition among the many peer religions represented at the

1993 event. Moreover, the elasticity of the Parliament’s welcome reached even beyond

the realm of religion to include Humanist groups representing the interests and concerns

of agnostics and atheists.29

Inclusivity not only embraced minority religious and secular groups but also sexual

minorities, although to a much lesser degree. There was, for example, a session on gay

and lesbian clergy facilitated by Annie Holmes and Tony Larson and sponsored by the

Unitarian Universalists.30

While open discussion of sexual orientation in the Parliament

of Religions may have caused anxiety among some participants, others regretted the

limited reference to gay and lesbian concerns at the Parliament.

Where were the visible gays and lesbians in the great circle Monday night? Where

are we at this Parliament? If we find ourselves in our scriptures, we do not find

ourselves in our churches. Or in our churches, but not in our leadership. Or in our

leadership, not in our dialogues. Would the circle have been complete without

people of color, or women? Why do you think it is complete without me?31

28 Vini Russo, “Witches at the Second Parliament of the World’s Religions,” Tides: A Journal of

Wicca and NeoPagan Spirituality, Samhain/Yule, 2, 1 (1993): 19. On Gerald Gardner and the

Neo-Pagan movements, see David Waldron, The sign of the witch: modernity and the pagan

revival (Durham, N.C.: Carolina Academic Press, 2008).

29 PWRPC, 59. For a comprehensive resource on Mormonism, see W. Paul Reeve and Ardis E.

Parshall, editors, Mormonism: a historical encyclopedia (Santa Barbara, Calif.: ABC-CLIO,

2010).

30 PWRPC, 67. For the topic of sexual orientation across religious traditions, see Arlene Swidler,

editor, Homosexuality and World Religions (Valley Forge, Pennsylvania: Trinity Press

International, 1993).

31 Signed by Kathleen, Your Voice, Publication of the Parliament of the People, Issue 3, ACPWR,

Box 2, Your Voice Newsletter, Folder: Your Voice (Publication) August 28-September 5, 1993.

189

But what seemed a boundless inclusivity did have its limits. The Council faced

difficulties in accepting three groups: the Unification Church, the Church of Scientology,

and the Ahmadiyya Muslim Community. Of the three groups, the most determined to

participate was the Unification Church. Founded in Korea in 1954 by Rev. Sun Myung

Moon, as its name indicates, a basic tenet of the Unification Church is to work for the

unity of all Christian churches and ultimately of all religions. However, the purpose of

uniting all religions into one global religion, together with doctrinal developments that

consider the group’s founder as a new Messiah and the organization’s cult-like tactics of

recruitment and maintenance of members, made the Unification Church fall in disfavor

with mainstream religions. On several occasions, leaders of the International Religious

Foundation, an organization sponsored by the Unification Church, approached Daniel

Gómez- Ibáñez showing the Unification Church’s interest in becoming a co-sponsor of

the Parliament. They even invited Gómez- Ibáñez to be part of their own interfaith

events. These Unification Church conferences were said to court the participation of

distinguished scholars of religion from prestigious universities who allegedly received

very generous stipends for their support and involvement. Interestingly, Hans Küng

showed an early awareness of this issue when he reported that “the second Parliament

should not be left to a certain religious sect with considerable financial resources which

had already shown interest in it.”32

Despite its repeated attempts to become part of the

32 Hans Küng and Karl-Joseph Kuschel, A Global Ethic, 45-46. For repeated attempts of the

Unification Church to get involved in the Parliament, see Dr. Thomas G. Walsh, International

Religious Foundation, to Gómez-Ibáñez, May 11, 1990; Huston Smith to Gómez Ibáñez, July 29,

1992; Thomas G. Walsh, Inter-Religious Federation of World Peace, New York, to Gómez-

Ibáñez, April 29, 1993, and Thomas G. Walsh to Gómez-Ibáñez, July 30, 1993, alleging support

of Huston Smith and even Martin Marty: “I recall Dennis McCann calling me in 1989 or early

1990 because at one of the initial planning meetings for CPWR he had heard Martin Marty state

that before any great effort be launched, other interfaith organizations should be consulted, and

Dr. Marty even mentioned, along with others, the work of the IRF, which, as you know, receives

most of its funding from the Unification Church.” ACPWR, Box 8A, Daniel Gómez-Ibáñez

Correspondence, Folders: 1989-1990, April 1993, and July 1993.

190

Centennial Parliament, the Unification Church’s application for co-sponsorship was

declined by the Parliament Board.33

Similarly, the Church of Scientology approached Gómez-Ibáñez on two occasions

showing interest in getting involved. Founded by L. Ronald Hubbard, also in 1954, the

Church of Scientology was the subject of several scandals and accusations of

brainwashing. Allegedly, told that their involvement in the Parliament would be

controversial, Scientologists declined to apply to become a co-sponsor.34

The Ahmadiyya Movement of Islam, the third entity that was not accepted into the

Parliament, considers itself a branch of Islam. The movement was founded in India at the

end of the 19th

century around the life and teachings of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, who was

in favor of dialogue among religions. This Movement is also well known for organizing

its own World Religions Conferences.35

After having been accepted as co-sponsors of the

Parliament in December 1992, objections were raised among mainstream Muslims about

the authenticity of the Muslim-ness of the Ahmadiyya Movement. Ahmadiyya

representatives wrote on March 11, 1993 to Gómez-Ibáñez making a case for their right

to be called Muslims. The issue of Ahmadiyya co-sponsorship of the Parliament was

unresolved until the last minute. On August 23, 1993, five days before the opening of the

Parliament, Catholic Brother Wayne Teasdale made a motion to the Board asking for the

acceptance of the Ahmadiyya Movement as a co-sponsor as recommended by the

Executive Committee. However, the motion did not pass, although with abstentions. The

issue did not die there. Ahmadiyya participation was included on the agenda of the

33 On the Unification Church, see J. Isamu Yamamoto and Allan W. Gomes, Unification Church

(Grand Rapids, Mich.: Zondervan, 2012).

34 Mary Anne Ahmad, Director of Public Relations, Church of Scientology of Illinois, to Mr.

Rothwell C. Polk, CPWR, September 27, 1989, and to Ms. Joyce Strombeck, April 6, 1990,

ACPWR, Box 10, General Parliament Correspondence, Folders: September 1989 and April 1990.

On Scientology, see Hugh B. Urban, The church of scientology: a history of a new religion

(Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2011). 35

See Iain Adamson, Ahmad, The Guided One, A life of the holy founder of the Movement to

unite all religions (Islamabad; Tilford; Surrey: Islam International Publications Ltd, 199?).

191

Council’s Annual General Meeting that took place in the Palmer House while the

Parliament was in session. Unfortunately, the minutes of the meeting are missing but, in

the end, the Ahmadiyya Movement was not allowed to take part in the Parliament.

Interestingly, while Catholic organizers were flexible enough to accept the participation

of the Liberal Catholic Church as a co-sponsor of the Parliament, mainstream Muslim

organizers were unable to concede sharing their name with an organ not recognized by

the majority.36

There was another notable absentee in the Centennial Parliament: American religious

history scholar Martin Marty of the University of Chicago. Involved in the early

initiatives to launch the Centennial celebrations, his academic schedule prevented him

from participating. However, he served as a discreet advisor during the earliest stages of

the Council formation. His absence from the 1993 Parliament parallels the absence of

Max Müller from the 1893 Parliament.37

Conflict at the Centennial Parliament

While the exclusion of the Unification Church, the Church of Scientology, and the

Ahmadiyya Movement was certainly a subject of tension and discomfort for all parties

involved, many more frictions challenged the spirit of religious harmony that constituted

36 For the official acceptance of the Ahmadiyya Movement as a Parliament co-sponsor, see the

Board Minutes, December 1, 1992, Box6B Folder Board of Trustees Agenda, Minutes December

1, 1992; for the controversy that ensued following the co-sponsorship, see Tashid Yahya,

Minister of Religion, Midwest Region, Ahmadiyya Movement, to Gómez Ibáñez, March 11,

1993, Box8A Folder March 1993; for the failed attempt at restoring Ahmadiyya co-sponsorship,

see Board Minutes, August 23, 1993, Box6B, Folder Board of Trustees Minutes, Agenda and

Notes August 23, 1993; and Annual Meeting and Board of Trustees Meeting at Palmer House

Hotel, September 5, 1993, Box6B Folder Annual Meeting Agendas September 5, 1993. On the

tension and differences between mainstream Muslims and the Ahmadiyya Movement, see

Ziauddin Sardar, œIslam must embrace different sects,” New Statesman, 135, 4806, August 21

(2006): 21, Factiva (Document NSTS000020060914e28l0000p). 37

See Ron Kidd to Martin Marty, February 03, 1989, Box9, General Parliament Correspondence,

Folder: February 1989; Martin Mary to Robert Schreiter, March 07, 1990, Box 10, General

Parliament Correspondence, Folder: March 1990.

192

the very essence of the Parliament. It was basically impossible that such a diverse and

complex array of religions and personalities actively present at the 1993 Parliament of

Religions could be immune to conflict.

India-related issues

Given the original Vedantist support for the centennial idea and the fact that the 1893

Parliament was regarded an entry point for some South Asian traditions into the West,

there was a sense of an Indian ownership of the event. This sense of ownership was found

first and foremost among Vedantists, who considered the Parliament as part of their own

larger celebration of the 1893 Parliament. In fact, the Ramahrishna Mission in Calcutta,

the Vedantist headquarters, issued its own programme and appeal for a centennial year,

from September 11, 1993 (opening date of the 1893 Parliament) to September 27, 1994

(its closing date).38

In the United States, the Vivekananda Vedanta Society of Chicago

also scheduled a week-long commemoration of the 1893 Parliament following the end of

the 1993 centennial Parliament.39

Furthermore, the Indian ambassador in Washington and

the Consul in Chicago sent a joint letter of appreciation to the Major of Chicago and

proposed that a street be named in honor of Swami Vivekananda. As a result, a street

adjacent to the Art Institute of Chicago, where the original Parliament was held, was

renamed after the Hindu guru.40

But the memory of Swami Vivekananda in relation to the 1993 Centennial found its main

sources of support at the core of the Council in Chicago. Executive Director Daniel

Gómez-Ibáñez first became involved in the Parliament project through his association

38 Swami Lokeswarananda, Swami Vivekananda and the World´s Parliament of Religions in

Chicago, AGTU, Bede Griffiths Collection, Box 4:15, Folder Misc. Papers, Parliament of

Religions, In Memory of Bede Griffiths. 39

The exact days were September 6-12, 1993, as reported by Swami Varadananda to Catholic

scholar Dr. Beatrice Butreau, December 2, 1991, ACPWR, Box 11, General Parliament

Correspondence, Folder: October-December 1991. 40

K. R. Sinha, Consul General of India in Chicago to Mayor Richard Daley, January 19, 1993,

ACPWR, Box8A, Daniel Gómez-Ibáñez Correspondence, Folder: January-February 1993.

193

with the Vedanta Society and his Vedantist leanings, if not identity, were known to the

Council members. This Vedantist interest materialized in the official program of the

centennial Parliament in Chicago, which was impregnated with the remembrance of

Swami Vivekananda. In fact, the 1993 Parliament program had ten sessions exclusively

on Swami Vivekananda: three major presentations, four seminars, two sessions in the

Academia section, and one artistic performance. No other religious figure received such

individual attention in the 1993 program as did Swami Vivekananda.41

But Indian influence on the 1993 Parliament was certainly not restricted to Swami

Vivekananda and Vedantist circles. The Chicago centennial was a veritable showcase of

Indian religious diversity. A summary look at the Parliament program reveals that Indian

religions, primarily various forms of Hinduism, had the largest number of presentations

and seminars in every single category of the Parliament program. In addition to

Vivekananda, but lower in number, other individual personalities had specific sessions

named after them, such as Paramhansa Yogananda and Sri Aurobindo.42

However, this Indian ownership of the event was pregnant with different tensions and

elicited some assertive reactions. The notion that Eastern religions were triumphally

penetrating the West was allegedly conveyed in a video about the first Parliament that

was produced for educational purposes in the months prior to the centennial and in

preparation for the youth plenary at the Parliament entitled “The Next Generation.” Some

Protestant volunteers brought this concern to Gómez-Ibáñez, claiming a pro-Eastern and

anti-Western bias in the learning materials. The fact that the person expressing her

misgivings declared herself both a Christian and a disciple of Sri Chinmoy, a Hindu guru

settled in the United States, added weight to her remarks given her own personal

appreciation and commitment to Eastern traditions.43

41 PWRPC, 41, 42, 49, 64, 70, 110, 119, 129, 149.

42 PWRPC. For Aurobindo, see 51, 62, 80, 81, 126. For Yogananda, see 35, 41, 61, 112.

43 Janet Kerschner to Gómez-Ibáñez, March 26, 1993, ACPWR, Box8A, Daniel Gómez-Ibáñez

Correspondence, Folder: March 1993.

194

As a result of the close association of the Parliament with India, many Indians from

different religious, ethnic, linguistic and cultural traditions, including Jains, Buddhists,

Hindus, Muslims, and Sikhs –both from South Asia and from the US- came to Chicago to

take part in the centennial. And this Indian diversity begot its own tensions. Ken Walker,

from the Vedanta Free Press, summarized several public conflict-filled exchanges that

took place during the plenary session entitled Voices of the Dispossessed.44

The country to get the most “flak” was India. The Tibetans thanked India for

refugee support during the Chinese invasion, but the other Buddhists delivered

heavy criticism towards India. The Muslims from Kashmir got into the roasting of

India on self-determination issues going back to independence from Britain. Then

the Sikhs polished off the attacks with a denunciation of India and a call for

Khalistan, the name for an independent Punjab. The atmosphere became heated,

and the Hindus in the front got real upset. I thought for a minute that this

Parliament of the World’s Religions was going to become the battlefield of a holy

war. Riot police were said to be waiting in the wings, and plain-cloth security

became more prominent.45

An interesting outcome of this open confrontation was that it elicited the mediation of

Native Americans present at the session, who succeeded in calming down the conflicting

parties by performing a peace dance.46

Another aspect of the tension among participants

from India had to do with issues of visibility and seniority of Hindu religious leaders.

Buried in the Parliament archives, an awkward, hand-written and almost illegible note

contains a threatening warning from a certain Yogi Shanti Swaroop to Gómez-Ibáñez.

Yogi Shanti Swaroop wrote that he would self-immolate by fasting unto death if the

Executive Director did not comply with his demands:

I am extremely sorry that you have broke [sic] your promise & allowed H-H Bal

Shiv Yogi –President of Universal Peace Foundation of India on stage –when

there was one extra Assistant of H-H Acharya Shulkumar Jain Mani you allowed

to seat [sic] on stage which according to my knowledge not on 1st [preceeding

44 PWRPC, 22.

45 Ken Walker, “The 1993 Parliament: An Overview,” in Vedanta Free Press, a journal for

growth dialogue and outreach, Special Parliament Issue, 2, 3, Winter (1993-1994): 10. 46

Teasdale and Cairns, The Community of Religions, 11.

195

word not clear] so, now if you don’t allow H-H Bal Shiryogi to do last universal

prayer OM SHANTI on the stage, I have no choice [sic] to fast unto death. As I

promised Shri H-H Bal Shiv Yogi to keep quiet – for the insult you have made to

him –who was respected by so many great saints & Sir Robert Muller –

Vicechancellor of Peace Univercity [sic] of Costa Rica.47

India-related conflicts before and during the Parliament might be regarded as the result of

the almost total inclusivity policy of the Parliament organizers. Prior to the Parliament, an

article appeared in an Indian newspaper portraying the event as part of the Indian radical

group Vishwa Hindu Parishad’s World Vision 2000 program, an allegation that was

categorically denied by Gómez-Ibañez.48

While the Council’s denial was accurate, it was

true that the Vishwa Hindu Parishad of America, based in Berlin, Connecticut, had been

accepted as a co-sponsor of the Parliament, which was problematic for Muslims, who

considered the group as anti-Muslim. Two weeks after the press report, the Indian

Muslims of America objected to the listing of Swami Chimayanand, leader of the VHP,

in the Parliament program.

We wish to remind you that this organization [the VHP] is a fascist and

fanatically militant organization that believes in suppressing [sic] religious

minorities like Muslims, Sikhs and Christians in India. In the last ten years they

have organized several sectarian riots against the minorities resulting in

considerable loss of life and property. Only six months ago they organized the

demolition of the 450 year old ‘Babri Mosque’ in India and the killing of about

5,000 innocent Muslim children, women and men. Their actions of burning

houses and buildings resulted in about 100,000 Muslims becoming homeless in

major Indian cities like Bombay, Surat, Ahmedabad, Bhopal, New Delhi, Kanpur,

etc. Swami Chinmayanand who operates many branches of his mission

throughout the world personally endorsed the demolition of the Babri mosque…

We fervently appeal to you in the name of simple humanity to not allow these

fascists who are masquerading as Hindu Leaders into your conference.

Undoubtedly Hinduism is an egalitarian religion and one of the major faiths of the

47 Yogi Shanti Swaroop to Gómez-Ibáñez, September 4, 1993, ACPWR, Box8A, Daniel Gómez-

Ibáñez Correspondence, Folder: August September 1993.

48 See “Clouds of Contention,” India Today, July 11, 1993, and Gómez-Ibáñez to Editor of India

Today, ACPWR, Box8A, Daniel Gómez-Ibáñez Correspondence, Folder: July 1993.

196

World. But fascists and assassins should not be allowed to hide behind its cover

and deceive the whole world.49

Interestingly, while some Muslims had prevented the participation in the Parliament of

the Ahmadiyya Movement of Islam, a case of decision-making based on intra-religious

sensitivity, other Muslims could not stop the involvement of the VHP in the Parliament, a

case of decision-making based on inter-religious sensitivity. Such were some of the

issues concerning India and the Parliament.

Jewish withdrawal

Other conflicts also erupted. While some Muslims objected to the involvement of some

Hindus –as in the case of the Vishwa Hindu Parishad—some Jews objected to the

involvement of some Muslims. In what seemed a chain of inter-religious clashes that

continued to challenge the centennial Parliament, four Jewish organizations withdrew in

protest at the inclusion in the Parliament’s program of controversial leader of the Nation

of Islam Louis Farrakhan. While some Jewish leaders were totally involved in the

Parliament planning from its very inception and throughout its planning period, there

were some Jewish organizations that only hesitantly endorsed the event. Michael Kotzin,

Director of the Jewish Community Relations Council of the Jewish United Fund of

Metropolitan Chicago, wrote to Gómez-Ibáñez five months before the Parliament

regarding its co-sponsorship:

We take this step [of endorsing the Parliament] with a degree of trepidation. All

too often international fora have been exploited by individuals, organizations, and

nations with beliefs and goals detrimental to the well-being of the Jewish people

49 Kaleem Kawaja, Director, Association of Indian Muslims of America, to Gómez-Ibáñez, July

26, 1993, ACPWR, Box8A, Daniel Gómez-Ibáñez Correspondence, Folder: July 1993. On the

Vishwa Hindu Parishad, see Manjari Katju, Vishva Hindu Parishad and Indian politics

(Hyderabad: Orient Longman, c2003). On the tension between Indian Hindus and Muslims in

America, see Prema Kurien, “Religion, ethnicity and politics: Hindu and Muslim Indian

immigrants in the United States,” Ethnic and Racial Studies 24, 2 (2001): 263-293, accessed June

28, 2012, DOI:10.1080/01419870020023445.

197

and the State of Israel. We welcome your assurance that the leadership of the

Parliament is committed to taking appropriate steps to prevent that from

happening in this case.

This apprehension seemed justified when on the third day of the Parliament, August 30th,

1993, the New York Times reported that Louis Farrakhan would be making a presentation

in the event. Kotzin immediately faxed Gómez-Ibáñez asking for clarification. The next

day, three other Jewish organizations –the American Jewish Congress, the American

Jewish Committee, and the Anti-Defamation League of the B’nai B’rith- echoed Kotzin’s

concerns. All three co-signed a message to Parliament Chair Dr. David Ramage:

We understand that Minister Farrakhan will be speaking because one of the host

committees has selected him to do so, and we recognize that his topic is not, on its

face, inflammatory in the manner of much of which he has written and said.

Nevertheless, given Minister Farrakhan’s long-standing tendency to espouse a

racist, anti-Semitic ideology replete with scapegoating of Jews and rhetorical

“Jew-baiting,” we cannot but be troubled by the fact that he will be speaking in

such a setting.

His divisive beliefs and style seem totally at odds with the Parliament’s purpose

of furthering inter-religious respect and harmony. It would be a shame if attention

were to be diverted from the noble purposes and hopeful events of the Parliament

by controversy surrounding Minister Farrakhan…

On September 2, Ramage sent Kotzin a carefully worded reply:

The concerns you and several of your associates have expressed have been

received… As the Parliament leadership, we feel we have addressed your

concerns. We are committed to mutual respect by all participants for the members

of all faith communities.

We regret any suggestion or perception that you have had that we in any way

were sponsoring someone with an understanding that the participation would

cause hurt and grief. We have tried to follow the beacon of hope that persons who

have so vigorously disagreed and have been hurt by each other in the past might

come together and find some basis for new beginnings and hope and harmony for

the future.

Ramage’s response generated a domino effect. On the same day, one after another, the

three major Jewish organizations officially withdrew from the Parliament with explicit

remarks of deep regret. The next day, Ramage issued a conciliatory statement:

198

We regret their withdrawal, but understand that each participating group must

determine for itself with whom it wishes to be in interfaith conversation. While

these groups have withdrawn, we are grateful that they continue to support the

purposes of the Parliament and that they respect the work of the many religious

leaders and other persons from every faith community around the world who

helped stage the 1993 Parliament…

The leadership of the Parliament is quite clear that it does not and will not endorse

or condone any presentation which contains anti-semitic rhetoric or any other

negative rhetoric about any religious or spiritual group. 50

Fortunately, Farrahkan, aware of the controversy provoked by his involvement in the

Parliament, avoided any mention of Jews. However, the pre-emptive Jewish reaction was

clearly a learning opportunity about the complexity of interfaith relations and the issue of

selectivity and timeliness for partnerships in interreligious dialogue. Furthermore, this

incident also showed the rich internal diversity among Jews. While these three influential

Jewish organizations withdrew their support, there were many individual Jews who

continued to participate in the event, particularly those who cherished the Parliament idea

and nurtured it from its seminal stages.51

50 For the series of exchanges, see Michael Kotzin to Gómez-Ibáñez, March 24, 1993; Michael

Kotzin, Jewish Community Relations Council, Sylvia Neil,, American Jewish Congress, Rebecca

Galler, American Jewish Committee, Michael Sandberg, Anti-Defamation League, to David

Ramage,, August 31, 1993 and September 2, 1993; Ramage to Kotzin, September 2, 1993;

Statement by Ramage, September 3, 1993, ACPWR, Box 7A, Board of Directors Correspondence

(1988-1993), Folder: Correspondence Concerning Jewish Withdrawal, March 24-September 7,

1993. 51

For a biographical portrait of Louis Eugene Walcott turned into Louis Farrakhan, see Florence

H. Levinsohn, Looking for Farrakhan (Chicago: Ivan R. Dee, 1997). On Farrakhan’s anti-Jewish

rhetoric, see Robert A. Rockaway, "The Jews cannot defeat me": the anti-Jewish campaign of

Louis Farrakhan and the Nation of Islam (Tel Aviv: Tel Aviv University, Lester and Sally Entin

Faculty of Humanities, 1995). For a more recent treatment of Farrahkan within the larger context

of anti-Semitism in the United States, see Elena Fallo, Antisemitismo in America: storia dei

pregiudizi e dei movimenti anti-ebraici negli Stati Uniti da Henry Ford a Louis Farrakhan

(Boves: Araba Fenice, 2008).

199

Greek Orthodox withdrawal

By the time Ramage issued his statement, news of the Jewish organizational withdrawals

had already reached the Chicago Tribune. The morning edition reported that at the

Parliament “Threads of unity became further frayed among the diverse religions.”52

But

conflict and confrontation were not limited to non-Christian religions. The word “further”

in the Tribune’s piece referenced the fact that the Jewish withdrawals were preceded by

another withdrawal, that of the Greek Orthodox.

The Greek Orthodox Diocese of Chicago, showing an ecumenical spirit that paralleled

that of other Orthodox bodies at a global level, was a member of the Council of Religious

Leaders of Metropolitan Chicago when this Council endorsed the centennial Parliament

initiative. However, the Council’s endorsement did not automatically mean specific co-

sponsorship from its members. Two and a half months after this endorsement, Andre

Kopan, a Greek Orthodox faculty member of Catholic DePaul University wrote to Ron

Kidd, the CPWR administrator, volunteering himself as an advisor. Kopan’s enthusiasm

for the Parliament idea was also instrumental in persuading Bishop Iacobus of Chicago to

involve the Greek Orthodox Diocese in the Parliament. Kopan wrote to his Bishop: “I am

confident that our Church would want to participate in this momentous event just like it

did one hundred years ago when it was in its infancy in this country.” Kopan was

referring to the presence of Dionysius Latas, the Greek Orthodox Archbishop of Zante at

the 1893 Parliament, the only representative (along with his assistant, the Rev. Homer

Peratis) of Orthodox Christianity at the event.

Bishop Iacobus agreed and the Greek Orthodox Diocese of Chicago announced it would

be a co-sponsor of the centennial. A Pan Orthodox Host Committee was organized, under

52 Michael Hirsley, Tribune Religious Writer, “News from the Parliament of Religions,” Chicago

Tribune, September 3, 1993, in ACPWR, Box 7A, Board of Directors Correspondence (1988-

1993), Folder: Correspondence Concerning Jewish Withdrawal March 24-September 7, 1993.

200

the direction of Fr. Demetri Kantzavelos, to coordinate the involvement of Greek with

other Orthodox Churches, and substantial sessions were included in the program.53

However, the ecumenical intention of the Orthodox did have its boundaries. The

sensitivity against any shared worship activity with other Christians is a well-known fact

about Orthodox Christian involvement in ecumenics.54

Furthermore, the seemingly

boundless inclusivity of the Parliament was beyond what some of the Orthodox faithful

were able to accept in good conscience. The presence of the Neo-Pagans, with their non-

monotheistic and nature-oriented framework, was particularly challenging. Therefore,

some Greek Orthodox bodies decided to pull out from the Parliament in protest against

the inclusion of what they regarded as “pseudo-religious pagan groups that profess no

belief in a God or a Supreme Being.”55

On August 31, 1993, Board Chair David Ramage

issued another conciliatory statement:

Some Christian Orthodox communities have informed the Parliament leadership

that they do not wish to continue in relationship to the parliament. We regret this

very much. … We understand that these communities are not comfortable with

being in conversation with the breadth of religious participation actively present

at this parliament. It is my hope that fruitful conversations will continue by these

Christian Orthodox communities with many, if not most of us here, as we walk

together into a faithful and cooperating future for the good of the world and for

the reduction of unnecessary religious conflict. We honor their integrity and hope

that their bonds of deep relationship will not be broken as a result of this

determination that they have faithfully made.56

53 See Andre Kopan to Ron Kidd, July 27, 1989, and Andre Kopan to Bishop Iacobus, August,

30, 1989, ACPWR, Box 10, General Parliament Correspondence, Folders: July and August 1989.

54 See Carlos Hugo Parra-Pirela, Who is my neighbour? A Window into the Interfaith Experience

and Potential of Member Churches of the Canadian Council of Churches (Toronto: The Canadian

Council of Churches, 2010), 46, 109-110.

55 Quoted by Russo from withdrawal statement in Vinnie Russo, “Witches at the Second

Parliament of the World’s Religions,” 19. 56

Statement by Chair David Ramage concerning Orthodox Withdrawal, ACPWR, Box6B, Board

of Trustees, Folder: Board of Trustees Statements concerning Jewish and Christian Orthodox

Withdrawal, August September 1993.

201

Ramage was not disappointed. Despite this incident at the Parliament, the Greek

Orthodox Diocese of Chicago remained a member of the Board of the Council for a

Parliament of the World’s Religions, but not without facing its own struggles when

confronted with initiatives it found problematic. This was still an issue two years after the

Parliament. In a letter to then chair of the Board, Rabbi Howard Sulkin, Fr. Kantzavelos

expressed his concerns.

After a restless evening, I am taking this opportunity to register a letter of protest

as a trustee of the Council for a Parliament of the World’s Religions and as a

faithful Greek Orthodox Christian. This protest is being lodged on the basis of

two incidents which occurred during the closing minutes of our meeting: First the

decision to send a letter of congratulations to the Dalai Lama for his recognition

of the reincarnation of the Pachen Lama; and, second, the corporate act of prayer

lead [sic] by Ms. Jaya Bhagavati.57

These sincere and heartfelt concerns of Fr. Kantzavelos highlight the complexity of

interfaith interaction and raise the question about where limits on interfaith cooperation

should be drawn and what the levels of interreligious engagement should be. This

certainly constituted one of the main challenges for the Parliament organizers.58

Other issues

From the earliest stages of the planning process there had been differences of opinion

between those who wanted the Parliament to be a religious event and those who preferred

to make it a religious platform for open discussion of the most compelling and critical

issues of the age. Daniel Gómez-Ibáñez, a non-religious professional, saw it as his role to

ensure the social orientation of the Parliament’s vision and program. But this was not

57 Kanzavelos to Sulkin, June 7, 1995, ACPWR, Box6B, Board of Trustees, Folder Board of

Trustees Correspondence 1995-.

58 A helpful history of the larger Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America is provided by George

Papaioannou, “The Diamond Jubilee of the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America,” Greek

Orthodox Theological Review, 45. ¼, Spring, (2000): 217-306, ProQuest (ID 220263695). For a

history from the earliest origin of Greek Orthodox Church in America, see Miltiades Efthimiou,

“A Brief History of Greek Orthodoxy in America,” Greek Orthodox Theological Review, 45. ¼,

Spring (2000): 193-216, ProQuest (ID 220282456).

202

without challenge. In December 1992, Leon Rhodes, editor of the Pennsylvania-based

Bryn Athyn Post, a Swedenborgian publication, complained to Gómez-Ibáñez:

We are eager to support a council of the world’s religions, but distressed –not by

your financial difficulties- but for the shift in vision. It has been evident that

forces have been at work to redirect the Parliament –to “critical issues of our time:

violence, poverty, injustice and environmental damage”. Commendable

objectives, these are far less important than the spiritual issues implied by the

word “religion”. It would not be difficult to list the REAL issues faced by

hamanity [sic] –piety, morality, spirituality, honesty, kindness and eternal

values.59

Mr. Rhodes’ remarks probably reflect some nostalgia and a sense of lost ownership of the

Parliament by the Swedenborgian community. It is important not to forget that the idea

for the 1893 Parliament came from Swedenborgian Charles Bonney and that his vision

for the Parliament was one of “all religions against irreligion.” Therefore, memories of

the 1893 Parliament were not only treasured by Vedantists and Bahai’s, but also by

Swedenborgians, who organized a program of commemorations scheduled for August

1993 at their Bryn Athyn Cathedral in Pennsylvania.60

Thus the social-issue orientation of the Chicago Parliament represented an area of tension

between Parliament organizers and those, like the Swedenborgians, who saw it as a

deviation from the faith-oriented event they expected. But even among those committed

to the social and political implications of religion in the modern world there were

important tensions, including a potential competition between the Chicago Parliament

initiative and other global interfaith organizations. Despite the good wishes of Paul Carus

and the Parliament Extension initiative he led in 1893, the Parliament idea remained

dormant for most of a century. However, other interfaith initiatives were active in the

global landscape, primarily the International Association for Religious Freedom, The

59 Rhodes to Gómez-Ibáñez, December 29, 1992, ACPWR, Box8A, Daniel Gómez-Ibáñez

Correspondence, Folder: December 1992.

60 Rhodes to Gomez-Ibáñez, February 18, 1993, ACPWR, Box8A, Daniel Gómez-Ibáñez

Correspondence, Folder: January-February 1993.

203

World Council of Faiths, The Temple of Understanding, and the World Conference on

Religion and Peace.

While these organizations joined in organizing the centennial celebrations and warmly

welcomed the Chicago initiative, it seems that the emerging Chicago Council posed some

inter-organizational challenges. When the centennial idea crystallized in Chicago and the

Council for a Parliament of the World’s Religions was incorporated, some Chicago

pioneers began to entertain the idea that the newly born organization would transcend the

centennial celebration and evolve into a permanent Parliament of Religions linked to the

United Nations and UNESCO. Moreover, Hans Küng’s rationale for his Declaration

“Towards a Global Ethic,” intended to become the centerpiece of the Parliament, was that

there would not be peace among the nations without peace among the religions.

Therefore, world peace was certainly at the core not only of the Parliament objectives but

potentially of the ongoing Council’s pursuits following the Parliament centennial

celebration. This represented a possible overlap between the interests of the World

Conference on Religion and Peace, already based at the United Nations in New York and

the Council for a Parliament of the World’s Religions. Unitarian Universalist Homer

Jack, one of the founders of the World Conference of Religion and Peace, commented on

possible challenges in this regard.61

Despite these tensions, Dr. William Vendley, director

of the World Conference on Religion and Peace, and a Catholic, appeared as a prominent

presenter of peace-related sessions at the Violence Symposium of the Parliament.62

In addition to these inter-organizational tensions, other problems unfolded during the

centennial celebration in Chicago. The Parliament of the People was organized at lunch

time on four consecutive days as a forum for registered participants to make contact

among themselves and express any concerns. Their proactivity and creativity

61 Homer Jack wrote to Gómez-Ibáñez on February 1, 1992: “I am very sorry about the churlish

manner in which WCRP/USA has reacted to your Chicago effort.” ACPWR, Box8A, Daniel

Gómez-Ibáñez Correspondence, Folder: January-February 1992.

62 PWRPC, 138, 139.

204

materialized in twelve on-site issues of a newsletter titled Your Voice, which served not

only as a helpful sounding board but also as a vehicle for criticism of certain aspects of

the Parliament. One problematic issue was the Council’s policy preventing any exchange

of information materials. Literature on display on the tables was consistently being

cleared by the hotel staff, including the issues of Your Voice. Another concern was the

apparent unavailability of the officers of the Council during the Parliament. Of course,

members of the Board of Management were extremely busy not only tending to their own

denominational involvement in the Parliament but addressing the conflicts that threatened

to disrupt the Parliament. Furthermore, Council members were overwhelmed by the size

and complexity of the event that exceeded their expectations and administrative capacity.

Despite these challenges, there is no doubt their efforts were rewarded with an

unprecedented success in the history of religious gatherings.

And even as Council members struggled to keep under control the event they had

organized, they also had to deal with their own internal issues. From its very inception,

the Council was tested by ownership-related confrontations and possible conflicts of

interests, most noticeably between Secretary Judith Lawrence and Administrator Ron

Kidd,63

between acting-Executive Director Ron Kidd and Chair-turned-into-Executive-

Director Daniel Gómez-Ibáñez,64

and between Gómez-Ibáñez and his successor as Chair

of the Board, David Ramage. The tension between Gómez-Ibáñez and Ramage escalated

to the point that Daniel Gómez-Ibáñez resigned during the Parliament. The only reference

to this event is provided by astute observer Anthony Judge, from the Brussels-based

63 Stanley Davis, Executive Director of the National Conference of Christian and Jews, to Judith

Lawrence, June 8, 1989, ACPWR, Box16, Nominations Committee, Folder: Correspondence

March-November 1989. 64

See Ron Kidd files in their entirety. A separate section in the ACPWR, they document a painful

grievance that came as a result of the dismissal without pay of Ron Kidd as the administrator of

the Council in December 1990. After various appeals from religious entities, both American and

international, sympathetic to Kidd’s cause and several mediation sessions, a settlement was

reached on June 7, 1993, just three months before the Parliament took place. For the settlement,

see Gómez-Ibáñez to Rabbi Bronstein, June 8, 1993, ACPWR, Box7A, Board of Directors

Correspondence (1988-1993), Folder: Mr. Ron Kidd Contract, correspondence.

205

Union of International Associations. According to Judge, “The last minute resignation of

the Executive Director of the organizing group reflected some other major tension which

was never disclosed.”65

Unfortunately, the minutes from a Board of Trustees meeting that

took place at the Palmer House during the Parliament are missing. But in an interview

with Carroll Fisher, Gómez-Ibáñez candidly disclosed that he had not always kept the

Board informed of his actions as he should have and that this acting on his own divided

the Board. He also referred to a clash of visions in the Board in relation to the Parliament,

an “encounter” approach held by the original board and an “event” approach held by the

expanded board that did not trust in his leadership.66

In the midst of these extremely complex and problematic scenarios, with so many inter-

religious blessings and conflicts intertwined in the Parliament’s web, and in which “one

person’s celebration [seemed to be] another person’s alienation,”67

the Catholic Church

was facing its own intra-religious blessings and conflicts as well. The Parliament

provided an opportunity to bring under the same roof a far greater diversity of Catholic

voices and positions than the Church itself could welcome in its own official venues. As a

result of being one among many, and not one above the rest in the context of the

Parliament, the Catholic Church experienced the impact of the Parliament’s inclusivity

within its own ranks, exposing the richness and complexity of its own internal diversity

to the Parliament and the larger public square, not with one, unified and unison Catholic

voice, but with many and sometimes discordant Catholic voices.

65 Judge, “Learnings for the Future of Inter-Faith Dialogue,” 350.

66 Fisher, Interfaith Dialogue at the 1893 and 1993 Parliaments of the World's Religions, 71-72.

67 Judge, “Learnings for the Future of Inter-Faith Dialogue,” 350.

206

“In omnia, Caritas”

As at the 1893 Parliament, Catholics were present everywhere throughout the 1993

Parliament. They participated as presidents, co-sponsors, presenters, performers, and

simply as registered participants. However, unlike the 1893 Parliament where official

Catholic participation in the proceedings was carefully designed and tightly controlled by

Bishop John Keane, at the 1993 Parliament the involvement of Catholics in the program

was not channeled and scrutinized by any single person. Some Catholic participants were

officially appointed or formally invited to participate by Church authorities, primarily

Cardinal Bernardin and his representative at the Council, Fr. Baima. Others, however,

were invited directly by the Council at the discretion of Executive Director Daniel

Gómez-Ibáñez, Program Chair Jim Kenney or any other program organizer, Catholic or

non-Catholic. Furthermore, mirroring the self-selection process of Board membership

that characterized the Council, the vast majority of Catholics in the official program

independently appointed themselves simply by submitting proposals that were accepted

by the program organizers. The result of this decentralized process was an extraordinary

diversity of Catholic voices in the Parliament program: male and female, clerical and lay,

monastic and socially-immersed, pastoral and academic, conservative and liberal,

obedient and dissenting, domestic and international, old and young, ethnically

mainstream and minority-based, ordinarily able and differently able, coalescing in the

same space and time as had never occurred in the millenary history of the Catholic

Church.1 As happened a century earlier, and to the astonishment of those who marveled

at or mistrusted the involvement of the Catholic Church in the first Parliament of

Religions, once again, a parliament of religions provided the Roman Catholic Church

with the opportunity to achieve something unique and potentially groundbreaking in its

1 The active and numerous presence of Catholic women at the 1993 Parliament alone serves to

justify this ambitious claim, provided that in the Second Vatican Council there were only 23

women as observers. See Adriana Valerio, Madri del Concilio, Ventitré Donne al Vaticano II

(Roma: Carocci editore Sfere, 2012).

207

life and history: to experience and publicly portray the wide spectrum of its own internal

diversity, testing the capacity and elasticity of its own internal and cherished unity. While

the Church throughout its long history had experienced the tensions of its own internal

diversity of opinions, as was portrayed particularly in the ecumenical councils, this

happened for the most part behind closed doors, perhaps with the exception of Vatican II

which counted numerous non-Catholic observers. However, the Church at the centennial

Parliament exposed its many faces to the most diverse religious public square ever in

history. From its own internal diversity, the Catholic Church engaged other religions in

their own internal diversity as well, which made the 1993 Parliament an eye-opening

encounter of diversities.

This chapter is divided into four sections: an overview of the complex Catholic

involvement in the 1993 Parliament of Religions, Catholic involvement in the

controversial Declaration Towards a Global Ethic, the Catholic place in the disrupted

Assembly of Religious and Spiritual Leaders, and the adjournment and aftermath of the

centennial for Catholics.

The Complexity of the Catholic presence2

Cardinal Bernardin appointed Rev. Theodore M. Hesburg of the Congregation of the

Holy Cross, President Emeritus of Notre Dame University and a world peace activist, as

the Roman Catholic president of the Parliament. Hesburg was one of 25 presidents

representing 18 religious traditions. Of the 198 local, national and international official

co-sponsors of the Parliament, eleven were Catholic institutions. In addition to the

institutional involvement of Catholics at the opening ceremony, eight of the nine plenary

sessions had Catholic facilitators, including Bishop Samuel Ruiz García –the

controversial advocate of the rights of indigenous peoples in Mexico- and the Honorable

2 This section relies heavily on the Parliament of the World´s Religions Program Catalogue

(Chicago: Council for a Parliament of the World´s Religions, 1993) (PWRPC), which has no

index of any kind. Here only the page numbers of the presentations are indicated. Please refer to

Appendix C for specific information on the title and date of presentations.

208

Robert Müller –former Deputy General Secretary of the United Nations and founder of

the University for Peace in Costa Rica. Furthermore, every day there were major

presentations delivered by Catholics—18 out of 175, that is over ten percent of the total.

Taken together, these major presentations offer a window into the Catholic messages to

the Parliament of Religions. The Catholic presentations can be grouped in six areas:

Vatican II and parallel Catholic ecumenical developments, pressing ethical issues,

Aboriginal-Catholic identity, Buddhist-Catholic dialogue, Hindu-Catholic interaction,

and women at the Parliament.

Vatican II and parallel ecumenical developments

The presence of an official Vatican delegate at the 1993 Parliament of Religions

underscored the fact that Catholic participation in the event received the highest possible

endorsement. Different from the 1893 Parliament, at which Archbishop Francesco Satolli

–the first Apostolic Delegate to the United States- chose not to set foot, the centennial

Parliament counted on the participation of another Francesco, a Capuchin friar made into

an Archbishop. His presence clearly showed how much things had changed in the

Catholic Church’s understanding of and relation to other Christians and non-Christian

religions as a result of the Second Vatican Council. Archbishop Francesco Gioia came to

the Parliament as a chosen representative of the Pontifical Council for Interreligious

Dialogue, led by African Cardinal Francis Arinze. It was agreed between Arinze and

Bernardin that since the Parliament –despite its global scope and significance- remained a

local Chicago initiative, Catholic involvement in the event would still fall under the

jurisdiction of the Archbishop of Chicago. Accordingly, rather than come himself, Arinze

sent Archbishop Gioia. Cardinal Bernardin would thus be both the Catholic host at the

Parliament and the highest ranking Catholic delegate at the event.

Archbishop Gioia gave a major presentation on the Catholic Church’s Theology of

Religions.3 He grounded his presentation in Vatican II documents, particularly the decree

3 PWRPC, 45.

209

Nostra Aetate, highlighting the aspects of truth and goodness present in all religions, and

the decree Ad Gentes, referring to the seeds of the Word also to be found in non-Christian

religions. Gioia also quoted extensively from the encyclical letter Ecclesiam Suam by

Paul VI, which he called the “Carta Magna of Dialogue.” After referring to the danger of

syncretism as an immoderate desire to make peace and sink differences at all costs, he

addressed the theme of salvation and the Vatican II doctrine that even non-believers who

do not know Christ through no fault of their own can be saved.4

Archbishop Gioia attended the Chicago gathering accompanied by Fr. Enzo Fondi who

participated in the Parliament as the official delegate of the Focolare Movement. Founded

by Chiara Lubich in Trento, Italy, in 1943, in the midst of the Second World War, the

Focolare Movement is an international organization that promotes universal unity and

brotherhood. The Italian word Focolare comes from Fuoco –fire- and conveys the idea of

a bonfire. As a unique initiative, they undertake the establishment of mini-cities called

Mariapolis or Cities of Mary, envisioned as utopian villages where unity “happens” in

the present through the practice of love and communal work and despite doctrinal and

other religious differences. The Catholic identity of the Focolare Movement is not only

indicated through the name of these utopian villages but clearly reflected in the official

name of the movement: the Work of Mary. The founder, Chiara Lubich, was both a

charismatic leader and a faithful daughter of the Catholic Church. She was also a

personal friend of Pope John Paul II. The Focolare Movement remains an all-

encompassing transnational network that includes consecrated single men and women,

whole families, and priests.5 Fr. Fondi and a local Chicago Focolare member, Jo Ellen

Karstens, led separate sessions on the Focolare ideal and the mini-cities respectively.6

4 Francesco Gioia, “The Catholic Church and Other Religions,” Archives of the Pontifical

Council for Interreligious Dialogue (APCID), Protocollo 039117, Nov. 24, 1993.

5 See Jim Gallagher, Woman’s Work: Story of the Focolare Movement and Its Founder (Hyde

Park, NY: New City Press, 1998).

6 PWRPC, 47, 108.

210

The Focolare Movement did not stand alone in Catholic ecumenical and interfaith

outreach. One of the major achievements of Vatican II for the purposes of ecumenical

and interreligious dialogue was the establishment of a supporting organizational structure

within every diocese across the world. It was precisely in the local Ecumenical and

Interreligious Affairs office of the Archdiocese of Chicago, led by Sister Joan McGuire,

where official Catholic participation in the centennial Parliament was first discussed and

acted upon. The same type of structure has been set in place by the conferences of

bishops in many countries. In the United States, the U.S. Bishops’ Committee for

Ecumenical and Interreligious Affairs was established in 1964 while the Second Vatican

Council was still in session. Dr. John Borelli, the Committee’s executive secretary for

Interreligious Relations, was present at the Parliament.7 So too was the National

Association of Diocesan Ecumenical Officers (NADEO), currently called CADEIO

(Catholic Association of Diocesan Ecumenical and Interfaith Officers),8 which organized

three separate sessions on Jewish-Catholic, Muslim-Catholic, and Buddhist-Catholic

dialogue, facilitated by Paulist Father Michael McGarry, Dr. John Renard, and Professor

Donald Mitchell respectively.9

Furthermore, in addition to these official Catholic structures for interfaith dialogue, many

Catholic religious orders, particularly missionary congregations and monastic

communities active in non-Christian lands, contemplate ecumenism and interfaith

relations as part of their mandate. But there are two distinct American religious

congregations whose mandates revolve around ecumenical dialogue that were also

present at the Parliament: The Paulist Fathers (1858), and the Franciscan Friars and

Sisters of the Atonement (1898). The Paulist Fathers had played a major role at the 1893

Parliament. Fr. Isaac Hecker, the founder of the Paulists, was a convert to Catholicism.

7 See Matthew Bunson, editor, Our Sunday Visitor’s Catholic Almanac (Huntington, IN: Our

Sunday Visitor’s, 2000), 584-585.

8 See Jude D. Weisenbeck, “National Association of Diocesan Ecumenical Officers,” accessed

June 27, 2012, http://www.cadeio.org/documents/chapter3.pdf

9 PWRPC, 67, 87, 113.

211

As he envisioned it, the purpose of this priestly Society was to work for the conversion of

Protestants. However, this original mandate –certainly active around the 1893

Parliament- was different in 1993. In light of Vatican II, the Paulists reframed their

mission and vision as the facilitation of ecumenical and interreligious dialogue.10

Paulist

Father Tom Ryan, Director of the Canadian Centre for Ecumenism of Montreal and a

recognized ecumenical leader and author, led a session at the Parliament on Catholic

interfaith relations. Other Paulists, Richard Chilson and Thomas Kane, also led sessions

on Spirituality and Africa respectively.11

The founders of the Franciscan Friars and Sisters of the Atonement, also known as the

Graymoor Friars and Sisters, Fr. Paul Wattson and Sister Lurana White, were Anglicans

who later converted to Catholicism and had their religious community received into the

Catholic Church. Early in the 20th

century, they established the Week of Prayer for

Christian Unity. Their ecumenical vision found affirmation and official endorsement in

Vatican II.12

Their Graymoor Ecumenical and Interfaith Institute was one of the Catholic

co-sponsors of the Parliament and Graymoor Friar and interreligious scholar and

practitioner, Fr. Elias Mallon, attended the Parliament as a delegate.13

Besides these two American-born religious families, a third Catholic community with a

distinctly ecumenical mandate was present at the Parliament. The Sisters of Our Lady of

Sion were founded in France in 1843 by a Jewish convert to Catholicism, Fr. Maria

Theodore Ratisbone. The Sisters’ original mission was to promote the conversion of Jews

by opening houses in the Holy Land and around the world. In light of Vatican II, the

Sisters now work to improve Catholic-Jewish relations and to witness God’s faithful love

10 See Boniface Hanley, Paulist Father, Isaac Kecker: An American Saint (Mahwah, NJ : Paulist

Press, 2008), with a concluding section entitled “Who are the Paulist Fathers?”

11 PWRPC, 116, 121, 85.

12 See Franciscan Friars of the Atonement, Archives Record Center, accessed June 27, 2012,

http://www.atonementfriars.org/communications_and_online_media/archives_record_center.html

13 Confirmation of his attendance is stated in his registration form. ACPWR, Box 34B,

Delegate Biographies M-Z.

212

to the Jewish people.14

The Sisters of Sion were actively present at the Parliament at the

grassroots level, particularly at the Parliament of the People section. The Parliament of

the People had a newsletter, called Your Voice, in which participants could post

messages. In this newsletter Sister Marge Boyle wrote that the “[p]rimary apostolic mark

of the Sisters of Scion [sic] is bettering Jewish-Christian relations, becoming a paradigm

for reconciliation of all peoples suffering prejudice and marginalization. Along with

Jewish-Christian bridge building I also work to reduce prejudice, bias, violence and hate

crimes.”15

Sister Boyle was also a panelist at an interfaith session.16

Common ethical concerns

Catholic theologian Chester Gillis argues that an inevitable consequence of the Church’s

encounter with the modern world is the acknowledgement of other religions that coexist

in that world.17

These religions are brought together in dialogue and shared action about

the critical issues faced by the modern world, such as economic injustice, war, and the

ecological planetary crisis. Catholic interfaith scholar Paul Knitter in his Parliament-

session entitled “Religions and Globality” underscored the importance of building a

bridge between religious identity and what he calls the two Others, that is the religious

other and the suffering other:

To be a religious person today requires one to relate one’s own religious identity

to the identity of other religious persons and to the identity of others who are

14 A very helpful history of this religious community is to be found in Congregation of Our Lady

of Sion, A Nineteenth Century Miracle: The Brothers Ratisbone and the Congregation of Our

Lady of Sion, translated from the French by L. M. Leggatt (London: Burns Oates and

Washbourne, 1922). For their post-Vatican II outreach, the most helpful resource is the official

website of their generalate, accessed June 27, 2012,

http://www.notredamedesion.org/fr/index.php

15 Your Voice, Issue #2, August 28-September 5, 1993, ACPWR, Box 2, Your Voice Newsletter,

Folder 2.

16 PWRPC, 99.

17 Chester Gillis, Roman Catholicism in America, (New York: Columbia University Press, 1999),

193.

213

suffering. Other persons who are religious in ways different from our own and

other persons or beings who are suffering because of their social or economical or

ecological situation –these two Others today confront and challenge anyone who

would call her or himself religious.18

But Knitter goes further to state that genuine dialogue is actually impossible if it is not

grounded in the work for justice. In his post-Parliament article “Pluralism and

Oppression: Dialogue between the Many Religions and the Many Poor,” Knitter called

attention to the relation between what religions are saying and what people are asking,

stating that under current unequal conditions, dialogue is not possible.19

The need to

address social challenges was clearly articulated by many Catholic presenters at the

Parliament, including Bishop Willie Romelus of Haiti and layman John Carr of the

National Conference of Catholic Bishops in sessions on the poor of the world and social

and economic theology respectively.20

In a complementary fashion, Hans Küng’s

statement that “there will be no peace among the nations without peace among the

religions” insisted on the inherent link between religion and public life.

The Parliament also served as a platform for one of the most pressing issues on the

contemporary American Catholic agenda: the Church’s stance against abortion and other

related concerns. Very fittingly, Cardinal Bernardin’s Parliament lecture on euthanasia

fell within this pro-life framework and exemplified his own idea of a consistent ethic of

life, imaged as “a seamless garment.” Through this vision the Cardinal attempted to link

abortion not only to other life-related concerns –such as euthanasia and the death penalty-

18 PWRPC, 134. Paul Knitter, “Religion and Globality, Can Interreligious Dialogue Be Globally

Responsible?” in ACPWR, Box 50, Written Parliament Presentations, Folder Knitter.

19 Paul Knitter, “Pluralism and Oppression: Dialogue between the Many Religions and the Many

Poor,” in The Community of Religions, Voices and Images of the Parliament of the World’s

Religions, ed. Wayne Teasdale and George Cairns, editors, (New York: Continuum, 1999), 200-

202.

20 PWRPC, 22, 48.

214

but to the larger issues of economic injustice and human rights.21

Lectures by Helen

Alvare of the National Conference of Catholic Bishops and by Francis Hannigan and

Mary Hallan of the Archdiocese of Chicago, echoed the Cardinal’s pro-life message.22

Prominent among the issues addressed by the Parliament were the Earth and its

preservation. Here the contribution of Catholic scholar Fr. Thomas Berry was particularly

outstanding. A member of the Passionist Congregation, a professor at Fordham

University and one of the most articulate and recognized eco-theologians, Berry affirmed

that “the result of the Parliament should be the recovery of an exalted sense of the divine

in the grandeur of the natural world.”23

Eight other sessions led by Catholics elaborated

on the ecological imperative of the present age.24

Completing a space framework with a

reflection on history, another Fordham professor, Erwin Cousins, built on Karl Jaspers’

concept of “the Axial Age” to propose that humanity is undergoing a “Second Axial

Age.” He argued that if the first Axial period saw humanity’s transition from tribal to

individual consciousness, then this second Axial period is moving humanity from

individual to global consciousness.25

Berry’s and Cousins’ affiliation to Fordham

University in New York brings attention to other interfaith scholars and practitioners

from the same Catholic house of studies present at the Parliament, such as Fr. Thomas

Matus, Brother Wayne Teasdale, and Dr. John Borelli, and suggests an interfaith

effervescence at Fordham in the 1970s that was still bearing fruit.26

21 PWRPC, 40. For Cardinal Bernardin’s vision of a Consistent Ethic of Life, see Joseph

Bernardin, The Seamless Garment: Writings on the Consistent Ethic of Life (Maryknoll, NY:

Orbis Books, 2008).

22 PWRPC, 40, 67, 108.

23 PWRPC, 85. See also Thomas Berry, “The Role of Religions in the 21

st Century,” in The

Community of Religions, ed. Teasdale and Cairns, , 182.

24 PWRPC, 80, 80, 86, 91, 95, 110, 112, 118

25 PWRPC, 71. See Ewart Cousins, “Religions on the Eve of the 21

st Century,” in The Community

of Religions, ed. Teasdale and Cairns, 159-162.

26 The writer owes this realization to a remark made by Fr. Thomas Matus in conversation at the

Camaldolese Incarnation Monastery in Berkeley, California, in the summer of 2011.

215

Aboriginal-Catholic identity

A highlight of the 1993 Parliament was the participation of Native religions and of

Aboriginal adherents to other religions. Such was the case of Aboriginal Catholics. This

posed an interesting challenge for the Catholic Church in the specific religious public

square provided by the Parliament. It is not easy to draw a line between the religious and

the cultural identity of Aboriginal Catholics, an issue referred by some scholars as “the

crossing of two roads.”27

Many Catholics of Aboriginal background owe their

denominational affiliation not so much to persuasion or personal conviction, but to a kind

of coercion resulting from the historic pressure of Spanish, or Portuguese, or French, or

British, or American imperial expansion at the expense of their own religious and cultural

traditions. A process of reconciliation of Native and Catholic identities is under way in

our lifetime in America and around the world, but that movement has not yet reached the

goals it has set for itself.28

Burton Pretty on Top was among those experiencing this

tension. A spiritual leader and a pipe carrier from the Crow Nation, Pretty On Top was

formally invited by the Vatican to participate in the World Day of Prayer for Peace

convened by Pope John Paul II in Assisi seven years before the Parliament.29

At the

Parliament, he shared the platform with aboriginal delegates from other nations and

referred to his Assisi experience by stating: “That was the first time that a Native

American religion had been allowed to participate in interfaith dialogue, that his people

were at last allowed to join the rest of humanity.” He was also quoted as saying:

27 See Christopher Vecsey, Mark G. Thiel, Marie Therese Archambault, editors, The crossing of

two roads: being Catholic and Native in the United States (Maryknoll, New York : Orbis Books,

2003).

28 For a treatment of this tension in a Latin American context, see Eleazar López Hernández,

Teología India, Antología (Cochabamba: Universidad Católica Boliviana, Editorial Verbo

Divino, 2000). For an Australian perspective, see John Harris, One Blood: 200 years of

aboriginal encounter with Christianity, a story of hope (Sutherland, N.S.W.: Albatross Books,

1990).

29 See Delegations present at Assisi, Pontifical Commission “Iustitia et Pax,” Assisi, World Day of

Prayer for Peace, 27 October 1986 (Vatican City: Vatican Polyglot Press, 1987), 199.

216

The Native American is greatly concerned that his ancestors’ bones lie gathering

dust in boxes in museums… [They are] said to have been bought, when in fact

there is proof they were stolen from graves. The Eucharist is not displayed in

museums, nor should the sacred objects of indigenous people be. What goes for

Catholic should go for Native Americans.30

A largely overlooked incident at the Parliament concerning Catholic-Aboriginal relations

was reported by Archbishop Francesco Gioia, the Vatican Delegate to the Parliament. In

his report to the Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue following the Parliament,

Gioia enclosed a Declaration of Vision written by indigenous activists demanding a

restoration of their dignity and rights.

We call upon the people of conscience in the Roman Catholic hierarchy to

persuade Pope John Paul II to formally revoke the Inter Cetera Bull of May 4,

1493, which will restore our fundamental human rights. That Papal document

called for our Nations and Peoples to be subjugated so that the Christian Empire

and its doctrines be propagated. The United States Supreme Court ruling Johnson

vs. McIntosh 8 Wheat 543 (1823), has adopted the same principle of subjugation

expressed in the Inter Cetera Bull. This Papal Bull has been, and continues to be

devastating to our religions, our cultures, and the survival of our populations,

Since 1492, 85% of our 145,000,000 populations have been decimated by the

effect of the papal Bull! 31

Archbishop Gioia noted that this declaration was read in public in one of the sessions and

that the session moderator asked the participants to raise their hand in support of the

Declaration. The session was almost unanimous in its support. Shortly after the session,

Archbishop Gioa, together with Fr. Baima and Dr. John Borelli of the National

Conference of Catholic Bishops, met with Pretty on Top to discuss the issue. According

to Gioia, Dr. Borelli stated that the issue of Aboriginal rights had already been placed

before the Bishops and that in due time the Bishops would provide an official answer.

30 Quoted by David Nelson, Notes and Reflections on the Parliament of the World’s Religions,

1993. Printed privately in an edition of 50 copies on the first day of Navaratri, 15 October 1993.

Revised edition, August 1994, ACPWR, Box 58, Folder David Nelson “Notes and Reflections on

the Parliament of the World’s Religions, 1993.” 88-89. 31

Relazione di Mons. Francesco Gioia in merito alla sua presenza al Parlamento delle Religioni

(Chicago, 28.8-4.9.1993). Courtesy of the Pontifical Council of Interreligious Dialogue, Vatican

City.

217

This incident took place the day before the Centennial’s adjournment with very little time

for further discussion. So this matter fell discreetly through the cracks.32

Buddhist-Catholic dialogue

Buddhist-Catholic dialogue was strongly represented at the Parliament. Important was a

Major Presentation on the Buddhist concept of Sunyata (Emptiness) and the Christian

concept of Kenosis (Self-Emptying). Presenters included representatives of Sri Lankan,

Thai, and Tibetan forms of Buddhism –including the Dalai Lama- and Catholic monastics

–men and women-, among them David Steindl-Rast, an explorer of the interface between

spirituality and science who has frequently been compared with Trappist monk Thomas

Merton.33

The session was organized by the Monastic Interreligious Dialogue (MID),

which constitutes an important interfaith initiative in the modern history of religions. In

the 1960s, Catholic Benedictine and Cistercian Congregations established the Aid a

l’Implantation Monastique (AIM) to support new monastic foundations in Asia, Africa,

and Latin America. A pan-Asian congress of Catholic monks in Bangkok was followed

by similar meetings in Bangalore and in Sri Lanka. These gatherings led, in turn, to a

series of direct encounters with Buddhist monasticism that unfolded in various initiatives

of mutual knowledge and understanding during the 1970s and 1980s. The Secretariat for

Interreligious Dialogue at the Vatican showed interest and offered support, and in 1977

two separate organizations were established: the North American Board for East-West

Dialogue and Dialogue Interreligieux Monastique in Europe. These two organizations

eventually merged into the Dialogue Interreligieux Monastique/Monastic Interreligious

32 For the text of the controversial papal bull, see Klaus Kloschorke, Frieder Ludwig, Marian

Delgado, editors, A History of Christianity in Asia, Africa, and Latin America (Grand Rapids,

Mich.: Eerdmans, 2007), 283. The Aboriginal demand remained alive among activists and

eventually was taken to the Vatican by an Indigenous delegation. See John L. Jr. Allen,

"Indigenous demand revocation of 1493 papal bull", National Catholic Reporter, Oct 27, 2000, 8,

GALE|A67328645.

33 See Clare Hallward, editor, David Steindl-Rast, Essential Writings (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis,

2010). An insightful reference to an exchange Steindl-Rast had with Merton is to be found on

page 24.

218

Dialogue (DIMMID), an international monastic organization that continues to foster

dialogue with men and women from not only Buddhism, but Hinduism and Islam as well.

Regarding Buddhism, particularly significant in the United States was the Intermonastic

Hospitality Exchange with Tibetan monks exiled in India, through which Tibetan monks

and nuns visited American Catholic monasteries and American Catholic monks and nuns

visited Tibetan monasteries and nunneries in India. Similar Catholic exchanges with

Japanese and other monasteries were organized in Europe. This process of Buddhist-

Catholic interaction and learning facilitated other interfaith initiatives, such as seminars,

symposia, and retreats. 34

The monastic session at the Parliament of Religions was a milestone in the process of

Buddhist-Catholic dialogue and a witness to the importance the Catholic Church gave to

interreligious engagement. As Catholic monk Pierre François de Béthune, a Parliament

participant, wrote: “more than a bridge, the monastic ideal is like a tunnel which ensures

unseen communication between monks of different traditions.” 35

The participation of the

Dalai Lama in the session was particularly significant. It provided the inspiration for his

proposal of continuing that dialogue in a monastic setting, where he could be “a monk

among other monks.” His suggestion was well received by MID and eventually

crystallized in three inter-monastic encounters at the Gethsemani Trappist Abbey in

Kentucky. Gethsemani Abbey was the home of the late Thomas Merton whom the Dalai

Lama met in Bangkok on the occasion of the first Pan-Asian Congress in 1968 during

which Merton died. Sister Margaret Funk, the organizer of the Gethsemani Encounters

and also a Parliament participant, recalled these gatherings as:

an opportunity to bring together, for an extended period of time in a monastic

setting, a small group of Buddhist and Christian monastics who are mature

34 See Pierre François de Béthune, OSB, “A History of the Monastic Interreligious Dialogue,” in

Catholics in Interreligious Dialogue, Monasticism, Theology and Spirituality, ed. Anthony

O´Mahoney and Peter Bowe (Leominster, Herefordshire: Gracewing, 2006), 3-9.

35 Béthune, “A History of the Monastic Interreligious Dialogue,” in Catholics in Interreligious

Dialogue, ed. O´Mahoney and Bowe, 7.

219

practitioners and teachers of spirituality. They would live, practice, and celebrate

together; and in that contemplative setting, they would dialogue about the practice

of the spiritual life and its value for the world today. While there had been local

intermonastic hospitality exchanges and dialogues in different parts of the world

in the past, this would be the first time an organized international monastic

dialogue on the spiritual life would be held at this global level of encounter.

To date these inter-monastic encounters have taken place every six years. The first

encounter, Gethsemani I, took place in 1996, three years after the Chicago Parliament,

and, like the Parliament, was attended by the Dalai Lama. The theme of this first

gathering was the Spiritual Life in the Buddhist and Christian monastic traditions. In

2002, Gethsemani II addressed the theme of suffering and finding peace in troubled

times. The encounter in 2008, Gethsemani III, dealt with the relationship of monasticism

to the environment. Taken together, these gatherings may be considered the most

concrete and enduring fruit of the Buddhist-Catholic dialogue session at the Parliament.36

In addition to this monastic session at the 1993 Parliament, two other major presentations

led by Catholics addressed Buddhism: Donald Mitchell’s “Two Types of Religious

Pluralism,” co-presented with Professor Masao Abe, Buddhist Studies scholar from Nara

University in Kyoto, Japan, and Jim Kenney’s “Convergence: The Sacred Wheel.”37

Hindu-Catholic interaction

Like Buddhist-Catholic dialogue, the interaction between Catholicism and Hinduism was

exemplified by several prominent Catholic participants in the Parliament, but it found its

most remarkable expression in the interfaith session entitled “Bede Griffiths –Swami

Dayananda- Visionary Guide and Universal Saint.”38

A disciple of C. S. Lewis at Oxford

and a Catholic convert from Anglicanism, Griffiths was an English Benedictine monk

who went to India in 1955 in search of “the other half of my soul.” In India he followed

36 See Monastic Interreligious Dialogue website, accessed June 27, 2012,

http://monasticdialog.com/.

37 PWRPC, 62, 113, 60.

38 PWRPC, 43.

220

the footsteps of other Catholics enchanted by the richness of Hinduism, particularly Fr.

Jules Monchanin (Swami Paramarubyananda) and Fr. Henri Le Saux (Swami

Abhishiktananda), co-founders of the Shantivanam ashram in the village of Thannirpalli

in Tamil Nadu. Griffiths took possession of the Shantivanam ashram and made it his

home for the rest of his life. Griffiths also changed his name and became totally

immersed in a sannyasi (Hindu ascetic) lifestyle while continuing to claim his Christian

identity, which, in the eyes of some, made him a living embodiment of both traditions.

Together with Monchanin and Le Saux, Griffiths is considered to be part of the “Trinity

of Thannirpalli.”39

Griffiths wrote extensively and went on several speaking tours of Catholic monasteries in

the United States. It was expected that Griffiths would be at the Parliament, but he

suffered a severe stroke in December 1992 and passed away the following May, just three

months before the Parliament. 40

The tribute session at the Parliament offered to his

memory brought together several people who had known him personally and had spent

time in his ashram. Among them were Sister Pascaline Coff, a spiritual friend and

confidant of Griffiths;41

Brother Wayne Teasdale, who was initiated as a sannyasi in the

Griffiths’ lineage; Fr. Raimundo Panikkar, who was one of Griffiths’ early teachers in

39 See Sten Rodhe, Jules Monchanin: pioneer in Christian-Hindu dialogue (Delhi: Indian Society

for Promoting Christian Knowledge, 1993) and Harry Oldmeadow, A Christian pilgrim in India:

the spiritual journey of Swami Abhishiktananda (Henri Le Saux) (Bloomington, Ind.: World

Wisdom, 2008).

40 The first documented inquiry about extending an invitation to Fr. Griffiths to come to the

Parliament dates from late 1991. “Did you tell Fr. Griffiths about the Parliament? Is he interested

in coming?” See Gomez to Mr. William Buchanan,

Vivekananda Monastery and Retreat, Ganges, MI, October 18, 1991, ACPWR, Box8A Folder

October-November 1991.

41 The Bede Griffths Collection at the Archives of the Graduate Theological Union (AGTU)

contains a treasure of correspondence between Fr. Bede Griffiths and Sister Pascaline Coff,

comprising letters over a span of almost twenty years. This exchange reveals a fine case of

spiritual friendship and contains precious information about Fr. Griffiths ´spiritual life and

particularly his crisis of faith, which he confides to Sr. Pascaline. Box 25, Folders

Correspondence BG to Sr. Pascaline Coff 1975-1983 and Folder Correspondence BG to Sr.

Pascaline 1983-93.

221

India; Russill and Asha Paul D´Silva, who were disciples of Griffiths and played Indian

music at the service, and Fr. Thomas Matus of the Camaldolese Benedictine congregation

to which Griffiths belonged and who documented his time with Griffiths in India in his

Ashram Diary.42

Sister Coff reports that Fr. Matus “read a magnificent six-page tribute to

this man of God, a heartfelt description of his guru, written by the new Prior of

Shantivanam, Brother John Martin.”43

A signed poster preserved at the Bede Griffiths

collection in the Archives of the Graduate Theological Union in Berkeley, California,

reveals that in addition to the Catholic participants primarily from the Benedictine,

Camaldolese, and Trappist Orders and the Catholic academia, those distinguished

attendees of this memorial session included His Holiness The XIV Dalai Lama; His

Eminence Paulos Mar Gregorios, Metropolitan of Delhi and the North Syrian Orthodox

Church of India and past President of the World Council of Churches; Dr. Karan Singh,

President of the Temple of Understanding, India Chapter, and former Indian ambassador

to the United States; Samdhong Rinpoche, Director of the Institute of Higher Tibetan

Buddhist Studies in Varanasi, India; and Swami Jyotirmayananda, author of the most

comprehensive study on Vivekananda.44

These friends and admirers of Griffiths constitute among themselves unique cases of

Hindu/Christian coalescence. Benedictine Sister Pascaline Coff was the founder of the

Ossage Monastery, a Catholic ashram in Sand Springs, Oklahoma, and a highly regarded

center of contemplation and interfaith dialogue for twenty-eight years until its closing in

2008. Sister Coff led sessions on Spirituality and Healing at the Parliament.45

Brother

42 Thomas Matus, Ashram Diary, In India with Bede Griffiths (Washington, DC: O Books, 2009).

43 Brother John Martin Kuvarapu was expected at the Parliament but was prevented due to other

commitments. Sr. Pascaline Coff and Sr. Margaret Funk, “The Parliament of the World´s

Religions, 1993,” Monastic Interreligious Dialogue, Bulletin 48, October 1993, accessed June 27,

2012, monasticdialog.com. The author is grateful to Camaldolese monk Fr. Bruno Barnhart, who

printed out this article for him at the New Camaldoli Hermitage in Big Sur, California.

44 “In memory of Bede Griffiths” (document with signatures of attendees), AGTU, Bede Griffiths

Collection, Box 4:15 Folder Misc. Papers, Parliament of Religions In Memory of Bede Griffiths.

45 PWRPC, 57, 114.

222

Wayne Teasdale co-authored with the Dalai Lama the Universal Declaration on Non-

Violence. He also led a session on non-violence at the Parliament.46

In the years

following the Parliament, a unique event in Teasdale’s life was that Cardinal Francis

George, the successor of Cardinal Bernardin in the Archdiocese of Chicago, received

Teasdale’s monastic vows as a Catholic sannyasi. Also exemplifying a unique integration

of Hindu and Catholic elements was Fr. Raimundo Panikkar, a scholar and former Opus

Dei priest expelled from the organization due to his unconventional views. Born in

Barcelona, Spain, to a Roman Catholic Spanish mother and a Hindu Indian father,

Panikkar’s unique religious journey made him affirm: "I left Europe [for India] as a

Christian, I discovered I was a Hindu and returned as a Buddhist without ever having

ceased to be Christian."47

Panikkar also led sessions at the Parliament on identity and

technology as part of the larger symposia on pluralism and science respectively.48

Participating was also Fr. Thomas Matus, who was initiated into Kriya Yoga by disciples

of Paramahansa Yogananda before he became a Catholic. Matus joined the Camaldolese

order, where he found a space for integration of his Hindu and Christian identities.49

Interestingly, Dr. Beatrice Butreau, a Catholic expert in interreligious monastic

spirituality, referred to Fr. Griffiths’ memorial as an indirect tribute to Swami

Vivekananda, also known affectionately as Swamiji, the most memorable figure at the

1893 Parliament.

46 PWRPC, 97.

47 The laudatio of Panikkar offered by Josep-Maria Terricabras on the occasion of the honorary

doctorate Panikkar received from the University of Girona is a helpful biographical summary of

this extraordinary figure, just two years before his death in 2010. It may be found in Spanish in

Panikkar’s official website, accessed June 27, 2012, http://raimon-panikkar.org.

48 PWRPC, 133, 136.

49 In addition to his Ashram Diary, In India with Bede Griffiths, Fr. Matus is the author of Yoga

and the Jesus Prayer (Ramsey, NJ: Paulist Press, 1984), praised by Joseph Campbell, and co-

author with Fritjof Capra and David Steindl-Rast of Belonging to the Universe (San Francisco:

Harper San Francisco, 1991) among other works.

223

One of the events at the Parliament of Religions that was an indirect memorial to

Swamiji was a commemoration of Dom Bede Griffiths, OSBCam, who died May

13, 1993. I call it an indirect memorial to Swamiji because Dom Bede was doing,

during his long life, the sort of thing that Swamiji was doing and urging. He was

trying to arrive at a lived experience of the spiritual Reality by using truths

discovered in various cultural traditions. [And she adds, Fr. Bede] created a living

room in which Christianity and Hinduism could share their beautiful treasures in

confidence and deep friendship.50

Beyond the memorial to Fr. Griffiths, there were other exemplars of Hindu-Catholic

identity. A surprising case came from Quito, Ecuador, in the person of the Rev. Dr. César

Dávila, a diocesan priest turned into a yogi and founder of the Asociación Escuela de

Autorrealización (School of Self-Actualization), a center for yoga and meditation.51

Fr.

Dávila delivered a major presentation at the Parliament entitled “East and West in a

Spiritual Embrace.”52

Another Catholic presenter strongly drawn to Hinduism was Sister

Charlene Altemose, a missionary Sister of the Sacred Heart, who lectured on the

Bhagavat Gita.53

John Schlenck of the Vedanta Free Press shared interesting insights

about Sister Altemose from a Hindu perspective:

Of all the groups at the Parliament, the Catholics seemed the least concerned with

self-presentation, the most intent on dialogue. One of my most beautiful

experiences was attending a lecture in a small room, given by a Catholic nun on

the Bhagavad-Gita. With an almost childlike enthusiasm for the Gita, she

proceeded chapter by chapter until, when she reached the eleventh chapter, she

50 Beatrice Butreau, “Dom Bede Griffith: Vedantic Christian,” in Vedanta Free Press, a journal

for growth dialogue and outreach, Special Parliament Issue, 2, 3

Winter (1993-1994): 21. In addition to his own extensive literary production, there exists a

growing bibliography on Fr. Griffiths. A helpful biography was written by Shirley du Boulay,

Beyond the Darkness: A Biography of Bede Griffiths (New Alresford, Hampshire: John Hunt

Publishing, 2004).

51 A documented biography, El Yogi de los Andes, was written by Edgar Aguilar Camacho. A

very limited edition, bibliographic details are lacking. For information about Fr. Dávila and his

school, see in Spanish Angel Ledesma Ginatta, Director Centro de Guayaquil, Asociación

Escuela de Autorrealización, to Gómez-Ibáñez, April 16, 1993, ACPWR, Box8A Folder April

1993.

52 PWRPC, 55.

53 PWRPC, 65.

224

described her own epiphany in Benaras, where one day at dawn, as she looked out

over the Ganges, the rising sun became for her the Christian host, the transformed

body and blood of Christ. One only wishes that more of the Vedantists at the

Parliament had been able to share a similar expression of dialogue.54

Needless to say, these Catholic cases of dual religious identity and experience pose a

challenge to a Western understanding of religious identity and to Catholic orthodoxy.

While a fluid exchange and circulation across religious traditions is common among

adherents of Eastern religions, religious identity in the West has been traditionally

defined by clear boundaries. In the case of the Catholic Church, cases considered

exceptional, such as those of Griffiths and Panikkar, were often kept at bay with utmost

discretion and were carefully scrutinized by the doctrinal authorities of the Church. In

sharp contrast with the Church’s discretion, these cases of dual Catholic religious identity

found in the Parliament a forum that showcased them to the world. Without a doubt,

some Catholic participants in the Parliament might have been rather perplexed by the

extent and implications of Catholic relations with other religions as embodied in the

embrace of dual religious identities.

Catholic Women at the Parliament

Perhaps one of the most unexpected revelations of the Catholic presence at the

Centennial was the active participation of women as presenters. Totally absent from the

Parliament program in 1893, women accounted for more than fifty percent of Catholic

presenters in 1993. They articulated a strong voice in all six areas of the program. They

included laywomen, such as ecumenist Hanne Marstrand Strong of the Manitou

Foundation, and Asha Paul D’Silva of Fr. Griffiths Ashram in India; cloistered nuns who

left their convents to attend the Parliament, such as Benedictine Sisters Margaret Funk,

Johanna Becker, and Susan Zuercher; accomplished scholars such as Sister Virginia Ann

Froehle, who lectured on the feminine images of God, Professor Mary Hunt, who

presented on feminism, and Dr. Mary Evelyn Tucker, who lectured of ecology; ecology

54 John Schlenck, “Faces of the Parliament,” Vedanta Free Press, a journal for growth dialogue

and outreach, Special Parliament Issue, 2, 3, Winter (1993-1994): 3.

225

activists, such as Carolyn Ford of Saint Isidore Parish in Joliet, IL, and Pat Smuck of the

National Council of Catholic Women and Ecology; and several combinations of the

above. They spoke about spirituality, prayer, popular religiosity, healing, women, pro-life

matters, prostitution, philanthropy, disabilities, ecology, feminism, ecofeminism, and

other religions. They also prayed, chanted, and danced.55

The extraordinary diversity of Catholic women at the Parliament is perhaps best

exemplified by Edwina Gateley and mother and daughter Claire and Mary-Ann Langton.

Edwina Gatelay, a lay leader and writer, is the founder of Genesis House, a house of

hospitality and nurturing for women involved in prostitution in Chicago, and of the

Volunteer Missionary Movement, a lay missionary organization with the motto “working

together in a divided world.” An English immigrant in Chicago, she underwent a

profound spiritual experience, first secluded as a hermit for a year and then living on the

streets among the homeless for another year prior to founding Genesis House.56

Her talk

at the Parliament was entitled “The World´s Oldest Oppression –Women in

Prostitution.”57

Mary-Ann Langton was at the time of the Parliament co-director of the Office of Persons

with Disabilities of the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Hartford, Connecticut. Born with

cerebral palsy, Mary-Ann benefited from her mother’s resilience in keeping her

connected to family, church, educational and job-related networks. Both daughter and

mother became actively involved in support networks for differently-able persons. They

co-presented a session entitled “Restoring the Shattered Community for People with

Disabilities” with Canadians David Wetherow of Winnipeg and Scott Klassen, a leader of

the disability rights movement in Canada.58

55 See appendices C and D for details.

56 See Edwina Gateley, In God’s Womb, A Spiritual Memoir (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books,

2009).

57 PWRPC, 107.

58 PWRPC, 117.

226

Among non-presenters, other prominent Catholic women attending the Parliament were

Dolores Leaky of the National Conference of Catholic Bishops, feminist Dr. Rosemary

Radford Ruether of Garret Evangelical Seminary, and Sister Joan M. Chatfield, a

Maryknoll Mission sister, Director of the Institute of Religion and Change in Honolulu,

and Chair of the Faiths in the World Committee of the National Association of Diocesan

Ecumenical Officers.59

The strong presence of Catholic women at the 1993 Parliament is a testimony to women’s

leadership in many aspects of Catholic life and in the religious public square despite the

restrictions imposed by an all-male Catholic priesthood and the millennia-old patriarchal

ethos of the Catholic Church.

Catholic critics, dissenters, “apostates” and absentees

The great latitude of the Parliament and of the Catholic Church’s involvement in the

event allowed for Catholic critics to take part. Without doubt the most prominent

Catholic critic involved in the Parliament was dissenting theologian Hans Küng, who

became an advisor at the earliest stages of the Parliament Council’s formation and held

the primary role of drafting the Parliament’s Declaration Towards a Global Ethic.

Another prominent case of Catholic dissent was that of the group Call to Action. Inspired

by a papal encyclical and a conference with the same name held in Detroit, Call to Action

–born in Chicago—advocates women’s ordination, a married priesthood, and a

democratic form of Church governance.60

The group acted as co-sponsor of the

Parliament.

However, Catholic diversity at the Parliament was not free of tension. The involvement

of outspoken Catholic priest and sociologist Andrew Greeley, a professor at the

University of Chicago, was a source of distress for some Catholic organizers. Greeley

59 See VIP lists, ACPWR, Box 35B, Folder: List of Prominent Attendees as of June 27, 1993.

60 For information on Call to Action, see its official website, accessed June 27, 2012, http://cta-

usa.org.

227

was scheduled to serve as keynote speaker of the Youth Plenary session, but he claimed

“this intent was vetoed by representatives of the Archdiocese.” He added, “I have

protested vigorously to Cardinal Bernardin about this veto. He assures me that he did not

know of it, does not support it, is investigating the matter and will if necessary reverse

it.”61

However, for reasons unexplained in the program files, Fr. Greeley remained

excluded from the Parliament program.

The Parliament program also featured self-identified former Catholic priests and nuns,

such as James Kavanaugh, who led an autobiographical session on freedom,62

and

Regina Sara Ryan, who lectured on spiritual families.63

The Liberal Catholic Church, an

esoteric community in Chicago, was also welcomed as a sponsor and presenter while

former Catholics such as Buddhist Ron Kidd and Vedantist Swami Varadananda held key

roles in the Parliament planning process.

There were also notable Catholic absentees. Mother Teresa was expected to attend the

Parliament, where it was hoped she would preside over a plenary session, but she sent

regrets. She had travel restrictions imposed by her doctor.64

Fr. Gustavo Gutiérrez, one of

the pioneers of the liberation theology movement in Latin America, was also listed

among the delegates. He too was unable to attend.65

Similarly, Abbot Thomas Keating,

the monk leader of the Centering Prayer movement from Snowmass, Colorado, was also

expected to take part in the Monastic Interreligious Dialogue session, but was unable to

attend due to ill health.66

Another Catholic absentee was spiritual writer Fr. Henri

61 Greely to Barbara Berstein, May 13, 1993, ACPWR, Box 18A, Folder 1993, January-May.

62 PWRPC, 104.

63 PWRPC, 90, 118.

64 PWRPC, 8.

65 See VIP lists, ACPWR, Box 35B, Folder List of Prominent Attendees as of June 27, 1993.

66 Pascaline Coff and Mary Margaret Funk, “The Parliament of the World’s Religions, 1993, A

Monastic Perspective,” MID Bulletin 48, October 1993, accessed June 27, 2012,

http://monasticdialog.com.

228

Nouwen, the author of The Wounded Healer and The Return of the Prodigal Son. At the

time of the Parliament planning, Nouwen was immersed in the world of differently-abled

persons as a chaplain at L’Arche Daybreak Center in Richmond Hill, Ontario.

It was also suggested on several occasions during the Parliament planning process that

the Pope himself should be invited to the Parliament, but Catholic organizers objected to

the idea. They warned that given the prominence of the Pope, had he attended, it would

have been difficult to prevent the Parliament from becoming a sort of a “Popefest.”67

The

Pope visited the United States just two weeks before the Parliament began, but the

objective of his visit was to preside over a World Youth Day celebration on August 12-

15, 1993 in Denver, Colorado. Although the Vatican previously endorsed the Parliament,

in his speeches during the visit, the Pope did not make any references to the upcoming

gathering in Chicago.

Despite these Catholic absences, no single religious denomination had as many speakers

and sessions in the centennial Parliament as the Catholic Church. While representatives

of various forms of Hinduism had the largest number of presentations across the program,

they did not claim to belong to any unified or centralized body as was the case of the

Catholic Church. Of a total of over 800 sessions, there were ninety in which Catholics

took part, primarily as sole presenters, more than ten percent of the entire program. Jesuit

Fr. David Toolan, of America Magazine and also a presenter in the Media symposium,

noted about Catholic participation: “Over recent decades, it would appear, we Catholics

have learned to listen to the truth in other traditions, and we now like a cooperative,

interfaith approach to major questions-a good sign.”68

67 In the Council’s archives a note reads as early as 1990, “Pope—has been suggested by many.

Must be discussed with Archdiocese.” See ACPWR, Box 35B, Folder Information Status for

Religious Leaders and VIPs, October 17, 1990.

68 David Toolan, “Chicago’s Parliament of Religions,” America, Sept 25, (1993): 3,

GALE|A13291489.

229

The Declaration towards a Global Ethic

Another central area of the centennial’s work under key Catholic influence and leadership

was the Declaration towards a Global Ethic, which was intended to be the most enduring

legacy of the centennial Parliament. However, this document may have been a source of

anxiety to some Catholic organizers since the idea of a declaration of this nature was first

proposed and later drafted by Catholic dissenting Swiss theologian, Tübingen professor

Hans Küng. A peritus (expert) during the Second Vatican Council, Küng was shrouded in

controversy in the early 1970s after authoring the book Infallible? An Inquiry, in which

he questioned the Catholic dogma of papal infallibility.69

Towards the end of the decade,

Küng was stripped of his teaching faculties as a Catholic theologian but he remained as a

tenured professor of ecumenical theology at the University of Tübingen until his

retirement. He has also remained a Catholic priest in good standing.

Küng’s scholarly research exposed him to other religious traditions and he began to

consider the possibility of a basic, global ethic on which all religions could agree. In early

1989 Küng presented this idea at a colloquium organized by UNESCO in Paris and the

following month he gave similar lectures at the University of Toronto and the University

of Chicago. He recalled that “in the lecture in the Rockefeller Chapel in the University of

Chicago I called on those responsible for planning the centenary celebration of the 1893

World Parliament of Religions to proclaim a century later a ‘new ethical consensus’ of

religions.”70

A month later, the Council’s administrator, Ron Kidd, contacted Küng who

eventually agreed to become an advisor to the Council. Coincidentally, Küng’s

appointment as an advisor to the Council was announced to the Board in the same

meeting in which the Board also learned about the endorsement of the Parliament by the

Council of Religious Leaders of Metropolitan Chicago, which appointed Sister Joan

McGuire as its liaison and what would also be the preamble for official Catholic

69 Hans Küng, Infallible? An Inquiry (Garden City, NY: Doubleday.1983).

70 Hans Küng and Karl-Joseph Kuschel, editors, A Global Ethic, The Declaration of the

Parliament of the World’s Religions (New York: Continuum, 1993), 45.

230

endorsement. Therefore, Hans Küng was “in” just a few weeks before the Archdiocese of

Chicago officially became a Parliament co-sponsor.

As the work of the Council continued to crystallize, the idea of a global ethic was also

maturing in Küng‘s thoughts and reflections. In 1990 Küng published his book Projekt

Weltethos, and the following year an English translation was published with the title

Global Responsibility: In Search of a New World Ethic.71

In early 1992, Gómez-Ibáñez

met Küng in Tübingen and formally commissioned him to draft a declaration for the

centennial. Küng agreed and planned his summer seminar at Tübingen that year around

the topic of the ‘Global Ethic.’ He also initiated a process of consultation, both

interreligious and international, and towards the end of October he sent a draft of the

proposed Declaration to the Council in Chicago. However, the draft was met with

objections regarding its length, content, and style. The document was challenged by some

as too long, too Western and Eurocentric, and too academic. Fr. Baima recalls that the

draft proposed four universal directives that were easily identifiable with four of the ten

Mosaic commandments.72

Particularly critical were the members of the Monastic

Interfaith Dialogue:

No one has a disagreement with the values and truths this statement contains. The

problem arises in its tone, its expression, its style and its ommisions [sic].

We need to find another language, a new way to express these truths, values and

attitudes etc. that is more truly universal, less western, Eurocentric, less formal,

abstract, even “less” Christian …

What is needed is a declaration that inspires, while it conveys guiding principles.

It shouldn’t exceed more than two pages…

71 Hans Küng, Projekt Weltethos (München: Piper, 2011); Hans Küng, Global Responsibility: In

Search of a New World Ethic (New York : Crossroad Pub. Co., 1991).

72 For a detailed account of the Declaration process, see Thomas Baima, “Toward a Global Ethic:

An Initial Declaration: Its Making and Its Future,” in The Community of Religions, ed. Teasdale

and Cairns, 143-149.

231

An “ethic” for the religions has to have its orientation from Ultimate Reality,

since this statement, this declaration is meant to be a prophetic call to the whole of

humanity…

There can be no global ethics without a universal spirituality. An ethics based on

reason alone is not sufficient …

Küng’s draft does not reflect a cosmic or creation-centered view. While he

mentions the environment, we do not get the sense that this is anything more than

a perfunctory bow to a pressing issue. The issue needs much greater attention in

such an important document as this is planned to be.

Küng shows no genuine awareness of or sensitivity towards other cultures. His

draft is harshly juridical. It needs to be intuitive and concise, as has been

suggested above.73

Particularly relevant was the notion that the declaration should not make any explicit

reference to God, because by doing so it would automatically exclude Buddhists from

endorsing it, since they are –at least from a theoretical standpoint- a non-theistic tradition,

hence the reference to an “Ultimate Reality” instead. A model document in length and

simplicity was another declaration written by Brother Teasdale with the support of the

Dalai Lama and endorsed by the Monastic Interreligious Dialogue on April 2, 1991, The

Universal Declaration on Non-Violence, which was eventually presented by Teasdale in

his session on non-violence at the Parliament.

Given the strong reaction to Küng’s draft, an extensive consultation involving 40 scholars

in Chicago was launched by the Council under the direction of DePaul Professor Jeffrey

Carlson. A specific concern had to do with language, since the original draft by Küng

was written in German and later translated into English. A new short text was written by

Gómez-Ibáñez, Fr. Baima, and Ms. Yael Wurmfeld,74

which was intended to become the

Declaration and introduce at the same time Küng’s draft now entitled the “Principles.” At

73 Reactions of the Monastic Interreligious Dialogue to Hans Küng’s “Declaration of the

Religions For A Global Ethic,” Dec. 5, 1992: St. Paul, MN, ACPWR, Box7A, Board of Directors

Correspondence, Folder : Hans Küng. 74

Draft of Executive Summary, ACPWR, Box14A, Executive Committee, Folder: ExCom

Agenda and Minutes July-August 1993.

232

the end of the long process, Fr. Baima wrote: “All parts of the text emerged out of a

process of interreligious dialogue. A process by which the historic religions of the world

were already engaged in conversation with each other about ethical norms. More than

200 theologians, scholars of religions and religious leaders critiqued the basic paper

which Dr. Küng drafted. Such that, every paragraph of the original paper was altered.”75

Eight months later, the two drafts –Declaration and Principles- were sent for a final

version back to Küng for comment. He wrote: “The initial basic structure and language

had remained the same through all the phases, but details of the text had been

considerably improved.”76

Regardless of the difference of opinions about content and

style and the modifications of the text, Hans Küng remains indisputably the source of the

idea of a Global Ethic as well as the architect and primary engineer of the Declaration.

The next step after the Chicago consultation was to send the document to religious

leaders across the globe for endorsement prior to the Parliament. Unfortunately, the

document was held too long by the Council despite Küng’s insistent requests for a

response after seven months of silence.77

Therefore, it was too late to circulate the final

version of the document as Küng intended. Such endorsement was to be sought instead

directly at the Parliament during the Assembly of Religious and Spiritual Leaders,

perhaps the most important event of the Centennial.

The Assembly of Religious and Spiritual Leaders

At the core of the Parliament was a convocation of prominent leaders of organized

religions and spiritual movements, invited to network at high-level, to endorse the

Parliament’s Declaration, and to offer strategic advice to the Council on the next steps

upon the adjournment of the Parliament. The very title of this Assembly –summoning not

75 Thomas Baima, “How to read the Declaration on a Global Ethic,” CPWR Newsletter,

September 1994, ACPWR, Box 1, Folder Vol 6, No. 1 September 1994.

76 Hans Küng and Karl-Joseph Kuschel, editors, A Global Ethic, The Declaration of the

Parliament of the World´s Religions (New York: Continuum, 1993), 52.

77 Küng to Ramage, May 7, 1993, Box 7A Kung´s folder.

233

only religious leaders but spiritual leaders as well- reveals the inclusivity of the

Centennial and reflects the growing distinction between institutional religions and

flexible, charismatic spiritual initiatives outside the traditional religious frameworks.78

The Assembly met the last three days of the Parliament in the afternoon, in a summit-like

event that took them out of the Palmer House into the capitalist hospitality of Mammon at

the Chicago Stock Exchange. There about 200 participants representing all the official

religious and spiritual traditions present at the Parliament were organized in roundtables,

each with a member of the Council’s Board and with a volunteer facilitator and without

access to a microphone. The only microphone in the room was at the stage occupied by

Chairman David Ramage.

While this initiative was enticingly original and held great promise, there were several

challenges associated with bringing together so much religious and spiritual “capital” (to

be consistent with their location) to the same place and under strict time constrains. First,

the very idea of separating the leaders from the rest of “average” believers seemed to

emphasize the idea of separation and exclusivity of certain ranks of the religious ladder.

If registered participants with no place in the general program, who gathered at lunch

time for the Parliament of the People, were called by Barbara Berstein the “little people”

of the Parliament, then la crème de la crème gathered at the Assembly might be called

the “giants of the Parliament,” certainly an unfair statement to the whole body of

participants. Second, given the Assembly’s time limitations, the spokespersons for the

religious and spiritual traditions represented -who had so much to say- felt highly

constrained as to when and how much they would say. Third, it was unlikely that leaders

of the highest caliber in their religious traditions would all accept to be led. Finally, when

asked to support the Declaration, many refused to endorse a document with which most

of them had had nothing to do until that moment.

The Declaration revolved around four irrevocable directives: a commitment to a culture

of non-violence and respect for life, a commitment to a culture of solidarity and a just

78 Robert C. Fuller, Spiritual but Not Religious (New York: Oxford University Press, 2001).

234

economic order, a commitment to a culture of tolerance and a life of truthfulness, and a

commitment to a culture of equal rights and partnership between men and women. Some

traditions resisted two of the directives in particular. It was argued by some that the

commitment to non-violence should not preclude the right to self-defense. Equally

problematic was the notion of equal rights and partnership between men and women,

particularly for those from religions and cultures where women are held to be subordinate

to men.79

In addition to the problems related to its content, there were objections to the

procedure implemented, which allowed no changes to the final document presented to the

Assembly. The Council explained to the leaders that the document was the result of an

extensive interreligious and international consultation, but some leaders disagreed with

the decision to prevent further modifications to the text. One of the facilitators at the

tables, Anthony Judge, commented in retrospect:

How could the organizers have led themselves to believe that people of such

authority would allow themselves to be steered and herded in this way? And why

would they want it to be so? What antiquated understandings of consensus and

order were governing their efforts? …

Neglect of such questions led to a degradation of the Assembly process on its

final day when the pressure to sign the Global Ethic was brought to a focus.

Different factions refused to be maneuvered, and endeavoured to make lengthy

speeches. Amazingly, there were shouting matches and key figures walked out.

The organizers, endeavouring to conduct the performance of a pre-scripted piece

of music, were faced with an orchestra that had abandoned the score. Members

were playing their own tunes irrespective of the resulting sense of discord.

Enlightenment was less than evident for such a spiritual assembly.80

The situation got completely out of the control of Chair David Ramage. Küng wrote:

“The lack of an agenda made it difficult for the Chairperson of the Assembly, Dr. David

Ramage, to bring order to a debate which often became passionate.”81

Raymon Panikkar

79 For a detailed account of these discussions, see Küng and Kuschel, A Global Ethic, 65-72.

80 Anthony Judge, “Learnings for the Future of Inter-Faith Dialogue. Part I: Questions arising

from the Parliament of the World´s Religions, Chicago, 1993,” Transnational Associations, 6

(1993): 353.

81 Küng and Kuschel, A Global Ethic, 67.

235

referred to the whole Assembly experience as “a really good try!” And Parliament

program director Barbara Berstein wrote that a “once in a lifetime moment for authentic

dialogue [was] painfully undercultivated.”82

However, despite the confusion and distress

of the situation, half of the Assembly followed the Dalai Lama in signing the Declaration

after it was suggested it be renamed Towards a Global Ethic, An Initial Declaration,

which implied it was a work in progress, a provisional project to be further developed.

Among those who refused to sign was Canadian senator, the Rev. Dr. Lois Wilson, the

first female moderator of the United Church of Canada. One of her objections was the

absence of any reference to homosexual persons in the document.83

Eighteen Catholics signed the Declaration, including Cardinal Bernardin and two other

Bishops; Sister Joan McGuire –the one who first got the Archdiocese of Chicago

involved in the Parliament, Dolores Leaky of the National Conference of Catholic

Bishops and two other women; Abbot Timothy Kelly from Gethsemani Abbey in

Kentucky, Brother Wayne Teasdale and two other monks; Rev. Albert Nambiaparambil,

a most prominent interfaith leader in India, Fr. Maximillian Mizzi, delegate of the

Minister General of the Franciscan Order, Rev. Thomas Baima, and another priest; Dr.

Robert Müller and another layman, and of course Professor Hans Küng.84

However, not

all Catholic members of the Assembly signed. The Vatican Delegate had agreed in

advance –prior to his arrival in Chicago- that he would not sign it so that the most official

Catholic endorsement would come from Cardinal Bernardin if he decided to sign it. The

Vatican Delegate also reported that Dr. Vendley, the secretary of the World Conference

on Religion and Peace, also a Catholic, did not endorse the document either.85

Similarly,

82 Barbara Fields Berstein, “A Parliament of the People,” in The Community of Religions, Voices

and Images of the Parliament of the World’s Religions, ed. Wayne Teasdale and George Cairns,

(New York: Continuum, 1999), 54.

83 The writer got this information in an informal conversation with Rev. Wilson in the spring of

2008.

84 For a complete list of Catholic signers, see Appendix.

85 Francesco Gioia, Relazione-Nota sulla dichiarazione, Courtesy of the Pontifical Council of

Interreligious Dialogue, Vatican City.

236

eco-theologian Fr. Thomas Berry did not sign objecting that the Declaration only referred

to the “human pathos” and overlooked the “planetary pathos.”86

With his characteristic generosity of spirit, Cardinal Bernardin not only signed the

Declaration but also agreed to contribute an article to an anthology about the Global

Ethic edited by Hans Küng –despite the editor’s uneasy relationship with the Vatican.

The Chicago Cardinal wrote about the Declaration:

Thoroughly Christian, it is also thoroughly Buddhist, thoroughly Jewish,

thoroughly Zoroastrian. Said another way, it is thoroughly human…

While an interfaith document cannot be expected to reach full conformity with

comprehensive Catholic teaching, a high degree of agreement is possible on many

particulars among the historic world religions. I am encouraged by how easy it

has been to dialogue with this document. It corresponds well with Christianity.

What is needed is to become as specific as the dialogue will permit. This will not

be easy. But if this experiment succeeds, the 1993 Parliament of the World’s

Religions will have given a special gift to humanity. May God will it to be so!87

It is still far too early to assess the impact of the centennial Parliament and, specifically,

of the Declaration towards a Global Ethic, but perhaps Cardinal Bernardin’s words may

turn out to be prophetic and dissenting Catholic theologian Hans Küng might end up

becoming the Vivekananda of the 1993 Parliament of Religions. History will tell.

Closing Plenary and Aftermath

More than a decade after the first meeting at the home of Mr. Dubocq and the subsequent

meetings in the kitchen of the Vedanta Society in Chicago to dream of a centennial

Parliament, and after an intense week of excitement and anxiety, of harmony and

conflicts -and hundreds of sessions, the Parliament of the World’s Religions assembled in

Chicago’s Grant Park on Saturday, September 4, 1993 for the closing ceremony of what

86 Dana Rodenbaugh, “Religious leaders endorse ´new global ethic,’”

National Catholic Reporter, Sept 17, 1993, 3, GALE|A13286003.

87 Joseph Bernardin, “In agreement with Christianity,” in Yes to a Global Ethic, ed. Hans Küng

(London: SMC, 1996), 141.153.

237

was considered by some observers as “unquestionably the most diverse celebration in

history.”88

Fr. Thomas Baima reported that 30,000 people gathered at the site for the

closing.89

Vedantist David Nelson chronicled that “[a]t 8:00 pm, two hours behind

schedule, the plenary began at last,”. A solemn procession, which included 225 members

of the Assembly of Religious and Spiritual Leaders, 14 Task Force members, and 41

Trustee members, was marshaled to the stage –as in the Opening Plenary- by Benedictine

Fr. Julian von Duerbeck. “Dignitaries were slowly and ceremoniously escorted to their

places on stage, one by one, and there were 32 in total,” including His Holiness the XIV

Dalai Lama and His Eminence Cardinal Bernardin. With a touch of humor, Nelson

added:

[The Dalai Lama] was quick to affirm the Buddhist reverence for life. “Life is

very precious, but look around you. We have too much life.” He implied the need

for nonviolent population control in the form of contraception. The idea drew

applause, while Cardinal Bernardin, prominent among the dignitaries on stage, sat

defensively, probably in a slow burn. Then the Dalai Lama laughed his wonderful

laugh and suggested another method: “We need more monks and nuns!90

Nelson’s portrayal of a defensive Bernardin does not match the natural openness of the

Cardinal in a pluralistic milieu. In fact, Cardinal Bernardin, something of a risk-taker and

an adventurous archbishop, was the one who opened the door to official Catholic

participation in the centennial Parliament. There he was at the closing ceremony, standing

with unfamiliar company on uncommon ground, with the humility of being one among

many, the pastor of the most powerful religious institution in Chicago, a bishop of the

largest denomination in the country, and a prince of the largest religious body in the

world, supporting an event conceived and actualized by the “little religions” of Chicago

after failing in his own attempts to launch such a gathering. Thanks to his ecumenical

88 Teasdale and Cairns, The Community of Religions, 12.

89 Thomas Baima, “White Paper on the Role of the Archdiocese of Chicago in the Parliament of

the World’s Religions,” confided to the writer by the Office of Ecumenical and Interfaith Affairs

of the Archdiocese of Chicago, n-d, 8.

90 David Nelson, Notes and Reflections on the Parliament of the World’s Religions, 1993, 101.

238

spirit the Catholic Church was fully present throughout the planning process and the

event, and it was now totally present in community for the closure of the Parliament.

After working together on the Parliament for years, the unfamiliar company began to be

transformed into nourishing friendships of mutual support and understanding, and the

uncommon ground began to be leveled off by Küng’s dream of a Global Ethic shared by

all religions while keeping intact their theological differences. Not long after the

Parliament was over, Chicago’s “little religions” were welcomed among the well-

established Christian and Jewish religious bodies of the city. The Zoroastrian Association

of Metropolitan Chicago, the Spiritual Assembly of the Baha’is of Chicago, and the

Vivekananda Vedanta Society of Chicago, the pioneers of the centennial Parliament,

joined the Council of Religious Leaders of Metropolitan Chicago, together with the Jain

Society of Metropolitan Chicago, the Council of Islamic Organizations of Greater

Chicago, and even the Church of Jesus Christ of the Latter-Day Saints excluded from all

Councils of Churches, a totally unprecedented membership expansion in the history of

ecumenical organizations.91

That ‘miracle’ could never have happened but for the

centennial Parliament.

The Council for a Parliament of the World’s Religions also continued its operations after

the Parliament was over. Its work in organizing the 1993 Parliament was recognized with

the 1994 City of Chicago Human Relations Award, granted by the Commissioners of the

City of Chicago.92

However, the successful celebration of the centennial Parliament did not mean that the

work of the Council was over. One important outcome of the Parliament at the local level

had been discussed and decided while the Parliament was in session. On August 31,

1993, a Metropolitan Assembly of Religious, Spiritual and Civic Leaders met at St.

James Episcopal Cathedral to plan the establishment of a local interfaith organization in

91 See http://crlmc.org, accessed June 27, 2012.

92 Daley to Ramage, January 4, 1994, ACPWR, Box 14A Folder Executive Committee

Correspondence 1991.

239

Chicago. Furthermore, in the Assembly of Religious and Spiritual Leaders, Dr. Robert

Müller called for an international initiative through which future parliaments of religions

would take place in different parts of the world.93

Müller’s appeal has crystallized in

three other Parliaments of Religions: Cape Town, South Africa (1999), Barcelona, Spain

(2004), and Melbourne, Australia (2009). All were similar in scope to the Chicago

centennial and all of them with active involvement of the Catholic Church at different

levels.94

The next Parliament of Religions is scheduled to be held in Brussels, Belgium,

in 2014.

The story of the 1993 Parliament of Religions and its aftermath and the key involvement

of the Catholic Church in it reflect not only the emergence of what Hans Küng refers to

as the contemporary ecumenical paradigm in the history of Christianity but also the

Catholic Church’s ongoing embrace of this paradigm in the post-Vatican II era.95

However, the openness of the Catholic Church to engage with other religions has also

been marked by tension. On the one hand, there is an open official endorsement of

ecumenical and interfaith initiatives at the local, national and Vatican levels. On the other

hand, there is also understandable resistance given the theological and political

implications such endorsement has for the Church. As an example, at the local level this

tension was embodied by Fr. Thomas Baima’s engagement in the ecumenical process of

the Parliament. While committed to the Parliament as the official representative of

Cardinal Bernardin in the Council, he showed a state of orthodox alert in regards to the

way the Catholic Church lent itself into the Parliament planning process and how the

Church’s involvement was perceived by non-Catholics. Just ten days before the

Parliament started, he wrote to Catholic volunteer at the CPWR, Xaverian Brother Ted

Funk, demanding more doctrinal precision in the way the Catholic Church would be

introduced in the Parliament information materials produced by Funk. Brother Funk’s

93 Joel Beverluis, editor, A Sourcebook for the Community of Religions (Chicago: Council for a

Parliament of the World’s Religions, 1993), 115-116.

94 For a list of Catholic participants in 1999 and 2004, see Baima, “White Paper,” 11-21.

95 Hans Küng, Christianity, Essence, History, and Future (New York: Continuum, 2008).

240

text read, “The Catholic Church was founded by the Lord Jesus Christ on Pentecost in 33

A.D…,” certainly a claim of doctrinal orthodoxy. Fr. Baima’s revision of the text read:

“The Catholic Church was inaugurated by the preaching of the Lord Jesus Christ and

confirmed by the sending of the Holy Spirit upon the apostles on Pentecost in 33 A.

D…,” an even stricter orthodox interpretation of the origins of the Catholic Church.

These interpretations remain a matter of theological and historical debate in scholarly

circles.96

Such guardianship of Catholic truth and identity was understandable in the context of the

Council for a Parliament of the World’s Religions, which constituted an easy pot for

religious indifferentism. An interesting example comes from the very “founder” of the

Council, Vendantist Swami Savershananda, when he wrote a long letter to Zoroastrian

Rohinton Rivetna proposing the World Day of Prayer for Peace convened by Pope John

Paul II in Assisi in 1986 as an exemplar of similar meetings that the Worship committee

of the Council could organize in preparation for the centennial. The letter showed the

highest appreciation for the Pope’s initiative in Assisi, which the Swami praised

throughout and commented in great detail, particularly the Pope’s speeches. Regarding

the Pope’s reference to Jesus Christ as the Savior of the world, the Swami wrote

candidly:

We Hindus readily can agree: we accept Jesus as an Incarnation of God, who is

finally ONE with Him, and this with all other Incarnations; as Krishna says in

Bhagavad-gita, everyone lives inl y [sic] in and through Him; and logically “He”

differs from “Jesus” only in the NAME. Not having this universal view, of course,

the Pope proceeds to analyse the differences which keep other religions apart, as

being due to human imperfections, which “have to be overcome in progress

towards the realization of the mighty plan of unity…” And here lies the R.C.

church’s task to heal the “wounds and divisions…” while searching out and

reverencing the “seeds of the Word present in such religions…” It ‘rejects nothing

96 Baima to Funk, August 19, 1993, ACPWR, Box 29, Co-Sponsor Cover Sheets, Folder: Roman

Catholic Church, Archdiocese of Chicago.

241

in these religions that is true and holy” and “aims” to recognize…promote the

spiritual…values that are found in them.97

Certainly, this appropriation of Jesus as a Hindu reincarnation, while revealing the

kindest theological hospitality and inclusivity on the part of the Vedantists, is totally

unacceptable to the Catholic faith and poses a challenge to Catholic orthodoxy in the

context of interfaith relations.

At the national level, the Parliament equally served as an example of this tension. The

definition and scope of the centennial Parliament as a local Chicago event, but with a

national and a global impact, created blurry boundaries of competences and ownership

for the Catholic Church. From the early stages of the planning process, the Archdiocese

of Chicago got involved under the agreement that the centennial project would be a local

initiative and as such any Catholic involvement fell under the jurisdiction of Cardinal

Bernardin. However, the centennial commemorated the 1893 Parliament, which has been

appraised as a watershed event in American religious history.98

Accordingly, the

centennial Parliament mobilized organizations and people across the country, who

flocked to Chicago for the special occasion. However, for reasons that are not totally

clear, some Catholic interfaith leaders at the national level apparently were not totally

supportive of the Parliament idea. Rev. Homer Jack, one of the founders of the World

Conference on Religion and Peace, reports that some major Catholic interfaith circles

were “running a major campaign against 1993!”99

Was it because the Centennial

celebration was “hijacked” by the religious minorities of Chicago and was not in the

hands of the Catholic Church? Was it due to the amateurism of the Chicago pioneers,

some of whom were not theologians by profession? Was it because the emergence of the

97 Swami Sarveshananda to Rohinton Rivetna, February 4, 1989, ACPWR, Box9, General

Parliament Correspondence, Folder: February 1989.

98 Catherine Albanese, and Stephen J. Stein. Foreword to The World’s Parliament of Religions,

The East/West Encounter, Chicago, 1893, by Richard Hugues Seager (Bloomington: Indiana

University Press, 1995), x.

99 Homer Jack to Daniel Gómez-Ibáñez, February 1, 1992, ACPWR, Box8A, Daniel Gómez-

Ibáñez Correspondence, Folder: January-February 1992.

242

Council for the Parliament of the World’s Religions as a new interfaith organization

posed a threat to already existing and well-established interfaith organizations that

enjoyed the favor and support of Catholic officials? But in spite of these possible

reservations, the National Conference of Catholic Bishops was represented at the

Parliament by outstanding officers, such as Helen Alvare and John Carr, who were listed

in the program as major presenters, and Dolores Leakey and John Borelli, who were lay

members of the Assembly of Religious and Spiritual Leaders.

There was a deeper issue at stake regarding the American Catholic Church in relation to

the Parliament of Religions. Perhaps no other event in American religious history made

so manifest the assimilation of the Catholic Church into American religious pluralism as

did the Parliament. It was the crowning of a lengthy process that started with Catholic

assimilation in other spheres. In 1989, Jesuit Joseph M. McShane, former president of

Fordham University, offered an overview of this itinerary, although not in the most

positive light:

In the past 40, and especially the last 20, years, however, the church has finally

had to face the corrosive effects of pluralism. Many of the barriers that once

differentiated Catholics from other Americans have simply disappeared. The

schools initially founded to insulate Catholic students from the lure of the outside

world and other religions have become instruments of social mobility.

The postwar suburbanization of America has been doubly destructive of the

protective Catholic sense of uniqueness. It has lured Catholics out of the cities and

away from their institutional empires, frustrating bishops and pastors who have

attempted to duplicate the networks that made urban Catholicism a way of life

and a world apart. Meanwhile, in the homogenizing suburbs, ethnicity has

evaporated or diminished to mere sentimentality or nostalgic attachment to folk

customs.

Finally, the fortuitous rise of ecumenism (aided by the elections of John F.

Kennedy and the pontificate of John XXIII, and given theological justification by

the decrees of Vatican II) undercut the motive for theological intolerance toward

other religious Americans. The breakdown of these old bases of differentiation

243

both signaled and facilitated the almost complete assimilation of the Catholic

community into the American mainstream.100

But Catholicism did not only become American. In the eyes of some, even inside the

Catholic Church, it converted itself into a “denomination,” one among the many religious

options in the diverse American religious market, or –as noted above—the Catholic

Church became the largest mainline Protestant denomination in the country.101

Needless

to say, this was a tragedy for those segments in the Catholic Church deeply committed to

tradition and unhappy with the wave of post-Conciliar changes. Catholic senator David

Carlin refers to this change in imperial-like terminology as the “decline and fall of the

Catholic Church,” which he attributes precisely to what he calls the “denominational

mentality.” According to Carlin, this denominational mentality puts harmony before

doctrine with the purpose of forging denominational consensus. As a result, he concludes,

it weakens Church loyalty, causes membership decline, destroys the dogmatic principle,

and erodes orthodoxy. For him, Catholics with this mentality are not “real” Catholics and

they should not count as Catholics so that the Church may get its numbers straight and

not presume a demographic majority it really does not have.102

At the Vatican level, this tension is also present. The process of contact with people of

other faiths encouraged by the Second Vatican Council was theologically supported by

the magisterium of John Paul II, who showed an extraordinary degree of recognition of

other religious traditions. In his very first encyclical letter, Redemptor Hominis, John

Paul II not only recognized that God acts outside the Church but humbly suggested that

the faithfulness of non-Christians could be a subject of emulation by Christians:

100 Joseph M. McShane, S.J., “The Catholic Experience at Taming Pluralism,” Christian Century,

April 26, 1989, p. 443, accessed June 27, 2012,

http://www.religion-online.org/showarticle.asp?title=867

101 Luke Timothy Johnson, “Abortion, Sexuality, and Catholicism’s Public Presence,” in

American Catholics, American Culture: tradition and resistance, ed. Margaret O'Brien Steinfels

(Lanham Md.: Rowman & Littlefield, 2004), 35.

102 David Carlin, The Decline and Fall of the Catholic Church in America (Manchester, New

Hampshire: Sophia Institute Press, 2003).

244

Does it not sometimes happen that the firm belief of the followers of non-

Christian religions –a belief that is also an effect of the Spirit of Truth operating

outside the visible confines of the Mystical Body- can make Christians ashamed

at being often themselves so disposed to doubt concerning the truths revealed by

God and proclaimed by the Church and so prone to relax moral principles and

open the way to ethical permissiveness?103

Six years later, in the encyclical Dominum et Vivificantem, the same Pope wrote that “the

wind blows where it wills. Vatican II reminds us of the Holy Spirit’s activity also outside

‘the visible body of the Church’.” The Council speaks precisely of “all people of good

will in whose hearts grace works in an unseen way.”104

Four years later the Pope

confronted the tension between the missionary mandate of the Church and the dialogue

with other religions in his encyclical Redemptoris Missio in which he once again stated

that the Church does not have a monopoly of salvation while making it clear though that

it has total access to it. Of this the Pope wrote: “Non-Christians can receive God’s grace

and be saved by Christ apart from the ordinary means, but the Church alone possesses the

fullness.”105

These solemn statements by Pope John Paul II were accompanied by

welcoming interfaith encounters throughout his extensive trips and they reached a

decisive and historic climax in 1986 in Assisi on the occasion of the World Day for

Peace.

However, this level of familiarity and fraternization with people of other religions made it

necessary to issue a counterbalancing reminder of the uniqueness of Jesus Christ as the

only Savior and of the Church as necessary for salvation, through the Declaration

Dominus Iesus on August 6, 2000. Issued by Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, then Prefect of

103 John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Redemptor Hominis, 6, March 4, 1979, accessed June 27, 2012,

http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/encyclicals/documents/hf_jp-

ii_enc_04031979_redemptor-hominis_en.html

104 John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Dominum et Vivificantem, 53, May 18, 1986, accessed June 27,

2012, http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/encyclicals/documents/hf_jp-

ii_enc_18051986_dominum-et-vivificantem_en.html.

105 John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Redemptoris Missio, 55-57, December 7, 1990, accessed June

27, 2012, http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/encyclicals/documents/hf_jp-

ii_enc_07121990_redemptoris-missio_en.html

245

the Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Dominus Iesus is a great and

solemn recognition of Jesus Christ in the context of the Holy Jubilee. The document was

ratified and confirmed by the Pope. While the Declaration simply affirms essential

Catholic truths, its timing was perceived by some as damage control in regards to the

consistent affirmation of other religions in the papal magisterium. 106

Dominus Iesus elicited immediate reactions around the world, among them a manifesto

from 53 Belgian theologians who rejected the sense of Catholic superiority conveyed in

the document and stated that parity with other religions is possible without absolutizing,

that judging other religions through Catholic lenses is a dead-end street, and that the

document shows a disregard of the ongoing ecumenical and interfaith progress.

Statements from the Archbishop of Canterbury and the General Secretary of the Lutheran

World Federation also followed.107

However, what seems to be overlooked is that

Dominus Iesus does affirm the Vatican II doctrine that God bestows salvific grace to

individual non-Christians in ways known to Himself, even though they receive it in a

gravely deficient situation. Regardless of how discouraging the last clarification may be

for Catholic interfaith enthusiasts, the affirmation of God’s business outside the Church

in such a restorative document is nonetheless a concession of enormous proportions

within a larger historical picture characterized by Church exclusivity.

It is also important to highlight that this concession is never made to other religions as

such, but to individual adherents of those traditions. Similarly, the Catholic Church

avoids referring to dialogue with other religions. Instead it prefers to say that the dialogue

takes place with people of other faiths, preserving in that way the unicity of the Church as

the vehicle of divine revelation. The Dominus Iesus initiative of then Cardinal Ratzinger

106 Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dominus Iesus, August 6,

2000, accessed June 27, 2012,

http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_2000080

6_dominus-iesus_en.html.

107 See Stephen J. Pope and Charles Hefling, editors, Sic et non: encountering Dominus Iesus

(Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books, c2002).

246

matched his actions as prefect of the Holy Office in the doctrinal investigation of

controversial Catholic theologians on the subject of other religions, such as Sri Lankan

priest Tissa Balasuriya, O.M.I. (1994), Indian priest Anthony De Mello, S.J. (1998), and

Belgian priest Jacques Dupuis, S.J. (2001).108

The tragic events of September 11, 2001 in the United States and their impact worldwide

prompted Pope John Paul II to summon a second interfaith summit of prayer for peace in

Assisi in early 2002. Again, prominent representatives of the world’s religions accepted

the hospitality of the Pope and prayed together but separately for a world that seemed to

be crumbling under the threat of terrorism fueled by religious fundamentalism. John Paul

II’s openness to other religions certainly never meant any incursion into religious

indifferentism. On the contrary, his papacy was characterized by a consistent call to

strengthen Catholic identity in the midst of religious pluralism and of the secularizing

tendencies in the contemporary world. His appointment of like-minded bishops and his

intolerance of dissent within the Church made some of his appraisers consider his papacy

as “restorationist.”109

The election of Cardinal Ratzinger as his successor suggests a continuity in this

restorationist approach. However, Pope Benedict XVI’s transition from his doctrinal

laboratory to his pastoral presence in the public sphere of the real world also suggests an

intriguing learning curve for a position like the papacy. Incidents such as the Regensburg

speech in Germany –which stirred Muslim protests across the globe—and his silence,

interpreted as prayer, at Istanbul’s Blue Mosque during his trip to Turkey clearly manifest

the sensitivity of interfaith matters in today’s pluralistic world. He elevated to the altars

108 On Balasuriya, see Pamela Schaeffer, "Condemned priest is restored to church." National

Catholic Reporter, 30 Jan. 1998: 3, GALE|A20229337; on De Mello, see Cardinal Joseph

Ratzinger and Tarcisio Bertone, “On the writings of Father De Mello,” The Pope Speaks 44, 22

(Mar/Apr 1999), ProQuest (ID 220789516); on Dupuis, see Christa Pongratz-Lippitt, "Writer

witnessed conversation between cardinal and censured theologian Jacques Dupuis." National

Catholic Reporter, Mar. 21, 2008: 17, GALE|A177813156.

109 See Joseph Varacalli, The Catholic Experience in America (Westport, Connecticut:

Greenwood Press, 2006), 49-54.

247

as a Blessed the Pope who summoned non-Christian religious leaders to the town of Saint

Francis to pray “together” and he followed his precedessor’s footsteps by

commemorating the 25th

anniversary of the historic summit with a similar convocation in

2011 to the dismay of his most devout restorationist admirers.110

Time will tell what the new developments will be in regards to the Catholic Church’s

positioning with respect to other religions. Surely waiting for a trinity of Parliaments, in

the expression of Parliament scholar Richard Seager,111

to be completed if another one is

celebrated in 2093 will provide a better historical perspective to appreciate how

unfamiliar will be the company and how uncommon will be the ground offered by other

religions to the Catholic Church, pilgrim of dialogue in a multi-religious world. It is only

hoped that, as in many instances in the past, the Church will rely on its ages-old wisdom,

when addressing diversity: In necessariis unitas, in aliis libertas, in omnia caritas –Unity

in essentials, in all else liberty, and in everything charity.112

110 For a variety of assessments of Pope Benedict’s interfaith incursions, see Richard John

Neuhaus, "The Regensburg Moment." First Things: A Monthly Journal of Religion and Public

Life 167 (2006): 63, GALE|A153413217; Edward McGlynn Gaffney, Jr, "Benedict's blunder:

ground rules for Muslim-Christian conversation." The Christian Century 123.22 (2006): 24,

GALE|A154239417; Francis X. Clooney, "Learning to listen: Benedict XVI & interreligious

dialogue." Commonweal 134.1 (2007): 11+. Academic OneFile. Web. 9 May 2012.

111 Richard Seager, “The Two Parliaments, the 1893 Original and the Centennial of 1993: A

Historian´s View,” in The Community of Religions, Voices and Images of the Parliament of the

World’s Religions, ed. Wayne Teasdale and George Cairns (New York: Continuum, 1999), 30.

112While this principle is commonly attributed to Saint Augustine, Armenian Christians claim the

authorship of Saint Gregory the Illuminator, who lived a century earlier. After completing the

third draft of this chapter, I came across Peter Hebblethwaite’s In the Vatican, How the Church is

run –its personalities, traditions and conflicts (Bethesda, Md.: Adler&Adler, 1986). As an

interesting coincidence, Hebblethwaite ends his book with a reference to this patristic maxim (p.

204). Rather than change my original choice, I join Hebblethwaite in bringing attention to this

insightful quote.

248

Point of arrival: Catholic identity, the non-Catholic other,

and the Chicago Parliaments of Religions

This was the story of the involvement of the Roman Catholic Church in the Chicago

Parliaments of Religions; a story of a community of communities struggling to be true to

itself among many other communities; a community of diversities among many other

communities internally diverse; a community incarnate in many worlds but claiming to

transcend all these worlds for the sake of a hereafter for which it also claimed to be the

door; a community born in history and maker of history, comfortable with the

preservation of tradition and cautious about innovation.

This study has explored a threefold tension experienced by the Catholic Church in its

relation to the Chicago Parliaments of Religions. First, the tension between being the one

and true religion and acknowledging the existence and rights of other religions with

similar claims of uniqueness and authenticity. Second, the tension between a universal

Catholic identity and Catholic inculturation in America. Third, the tension between the

immutability of Catholic truths considered to be revealed by God, and their translatability

into the new languages offered by the modern world.

It was argued that in the three cases, a shift took place, but not a complete break. Instead

a stretch occurred, enacting a lived intra-Catholic tension between those who welcomed

and those who regretted the Church’s intercourse with other religions, with American

culture, and with modernity.

In all three instances of tension between tradition and innovation within Catholic identity

and policy, Catholic involvement in the Chicago Parliaments of Religions demonstrates

the capacity of the Catholic Church to hold in her bosom the polarities of religious

pluralism, of cultural diversity, of historical discernment, and adaptability, without

shedding her sense of her own identity. Catholic involvement in the Chicago Parliaments

of Religions offers a window through which to view the development of Catholic

249

interfaith relations in the century framed by both events from a primarily exclusivist

position with signs of inclusivity to a primarily inclusivist position with signs of

exclusivity, and an unintended incursion in the 1993 Parliament into a pluralist position

in which the Church acted and was assumed by its partners as one religion among many

religions. This Catholic interfaith journey provides the opportunity to raise important

questions about Catholic identity, the Catholic understanding of non-Catholics, and

Catholic interfaith relations. Some of these questions are:

What is the meaning of being Catholic? Is there one homogeneous Catholic identity or

are there many Catholic identities? How do Catholic identity and ongoing Catholic

interaction with surrounding cultures relate to one another? Who is the non-Catholic

other for the Catholic self? What are the degrees of proximity and/or separation between

Catholics and non-Catholics? How are Catholics perceived by non-Catholics? What is the

relation between the missionary mandate of the Catholic Church and the Church’s

commitment to interfaith relations? How do the Catholic Church and the global interfaith

movement relate to one another? What are the official forms of interfaith dialogue and

the unintended consequences of such forms? What were and could still be the unintended

consequences of the American Catholic Church’s decision to get involved in such public

forums as the Chicago Parliaments of Religions?

These questions are pregnant with a creative tension. Their potential answers also suggest

the unavoidability of the permanence of such tensions. Inasmuch as moments in history

can provide snapshots of processes which in themselves continue for millennia, one set of

potential answers to our questions could be articulated in the light of the Chicago

Parliaments of Religions. These questions and their answers belong to the realm of

ecclesiology, particularly historical ecclesiology. But they equally pertain to the social

sciences. Both ecclesiological considerations and social investigation require historical

research as a necessary source of data and hermeneutical insights.1 At the theological

1 On the relation between theology and the social sciences, see Michael Horace Barnes, editor,

Theology and the social sciences (Maryknoll, N.Y.: Orbis Books 2001).

250

level, the necessary relation between Christology and ecclesiology emerges in any effort

to articulate an answer to these questions, because the core Christian concept of kenosis

or incarnation seems to shed light over some of the answers.2

The meaning(s) of Catholic identity and the Chicago

Parliaments of Religions

José Ortega y Gasset’s maxim –“I am myself and my circumstance”- seems to accurately

describe the key role that context plays in the shaping of individual and collective

identities. 3

The long history of Christianity and the specific history of the Catholic

Church offer ample evidence of how the interaction between religion and culture is filled

with mutual influences and with tension, particularly because the Church sees itself as

being in the world but without belonging to it. This tension suggests that a dynamic and

fluid rather than static and fixed understanding of Catholic identity seems to more

faithfully honor the experience of being Catholic.4

This was the case from the earliest days of the Church. The first contextual challenge the

primitive Church faced was to differentiate itself from the religion of Israel while

interpreting itself in continuity with it as the Christian adoption of the Hebrew scriptures

shows.5 After its early incursions into the Greco-Roman world as a counter-cultural

movement, the Church became institutionalized as the official religion of the Roman

Empire. Inculturation became the norm as the Church accommodated to its new situation

2 The author first heard about the kenotic approach to interfaith dialogue from Harvard Professor

Harvey Cox at a lecture entitled “Self-emptying and the courage to witness. Re-thinking

identity.” offered by Cox at the Pontifical Gregorian University in the Winter semester of 2010.

3 See José Ortega y Gasset, Meditaciones sobre la Literatura y el Arte (Madrid: Castalia, 1987),

65.

4 For an interesting categorization of various styles of being Catholic , see Frans Jozef van Beeck,

Catholic identity after Vatican II: three types of faith in the one Church (Chicago : Loyola

University Press, 1985).

5 See John Fieldsend et al., Roots and branches: explorations into the Jewish context of the

Christian faith (Bedford: PWM Trust and The Centre for Biblical and Hebraic Studies, c1998).

251

of political privilege. This was not an easy process. Some Christians rejected the

Church’s marriage of convenience to her imperial suitor, formerly her oppressor, and

decided to join the monks of the desert. In doing so, they might have asked themselves

whether the Roman Empire converted to Christianity or Christianity converted to the

Empire. A DNA test of Christian doctrine, morals, rituals, laws, and organization would

offer indisputable evidence of the strong –though selective- assimilation of Greco-Roman

features by the early Church, and specifically the Church of Rome. The Church borrowed

widely from the language, philosophical categories, rites of initiation, festivals, and

political structures of the Greco-Roman world so as to make sense of itself within that

particular context and explain itself to it.6 A similar process of tension and assimilation

took place when the Church interacted with the Germanic peoples, losing control over the

erection of churches and the designation of bishops and clergy to the secular powers but

gaining material power and wealth through the assimilation of the feudal system into

monasticism, bishoprics, and the papacy.7

In this way, the very world that the Church was meant to evangelize and save became

entrenched in the Church’s development as an institution, which, in the case of the

Roman Church, eventually evolved into the temporal power of the papacy and the still-

current statehood of Vatican City. However, by incorporating features of the world

around, the Church became a world in itself. The community that was meant to be a

servant of the Kingdom of God on earth slowly evolved into an end in itself, in tension

with the “new” world around, that is anything outside the Church.

Tension is also reflected in Church governance as related to the level of the competencies

of local bishops vis-à-vis the oversight of the Pope, and between Councils as privileged

6 For a different opinion, see Ronald H. Nash, Christianity and the Hellenistic world (Grand

Rapids, Mich.: Zondervan; Dallas, Tex.: Probe Ministries International, 1984).

7 See Uta-Renate Blumenthal, The investiture controversy: church and monarchy from the ninth

to the twelfth century (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1988).

252

sources of Church doctrine and legislation and the ongoing leadership of the Pope.8 Can

inculturation and its tensions be another dimension of the incarnation, but this time

porous and permeable, in which the wheat and the weed are meant to coexist in the same

field of Church life?9

Inculturation was precisely the primary source of tension for the Catholic Church in the

United States at the time of the 1893 Parliament of Religions in Chicago. Catholics in

America faced the dilemma of being faithful to their Church, which had its center in

Rome, and at the same time being loyal to America. This was not an easy tension. The

Catholic Church claimed to be the only and true religion. America was the land of

religious freedom. The Catholic Church operated within a monarchical framework that

demanded obedience from the faithful. America was the land of democracy and freedom

of expression. The Catholic Church’s political philosophy, in accordance with its self-

understanding as the only true religion, was to keep its exclusive or at least privileged

status in the affairs of the state. America proclaimed the separation of religion and the

state. The Catholic Church was the quintessential manifestation of the Old World, an

embodiment of antiquity and the custodian of tradition. America was the emerging leader

of the New World, embracing modern progress and fostering innovation and change. This

tension permeated the identity of American Catholics and was lived out fully within the

Church itself. It divided those who perceived the Americanization of the Catholic Church

as a threat to its Roman identity from those who saw Americanization as seizing the

opportunity for full inclusion in America although not in opposition to Rome. The

defenders of all things Roman were not always aware that the Roman character of

Catholicism was precisely the result of another and similar process of historic

assimilation and selection and of cultural canonization.10

For both Church factions,

8 See J.H. Burns and Thomas M. Izbicki, editors, Conciliarism and Papalism (Cambridge ; New

York: Cambridge University Press, 1997).

9 Matthew 13: 24-30.

10 On American Catholic identity, see Maura Jane Farrelly, Papist patriots: the making of an

American Catholic identity (New York: Oxford University Press, 2012).

253

however, the 1893 Parliament of Religions constituted a liminal space of surrender and

survival, at the same time a situation of utmost compromise between the Church’s

absolute claim of religious supremacy and its obligating need for social and political

inclusion in America. As an immigrant Church, perceived by many Protestants as an

unwelcome outsider, the exclusivist Catholic Church had to acquiesce to be included as

one among many in pluralist religious America. At the same time, the Church was also

regarded by the event organizers as a necessary partner for the first Parliament of

Religions.

Closely related to issues of inculturation are the implications of contextuality. What was

possible in the United States was not necessarily feasible in Europe. As French Cardinal

Guillaume Meignan stated in arguing against the idea of a Parliament of Religions in

Paris, America was not France.11

What goes for Catholics in America does not

necessarily apply to Catholics elsewhere. This implies an unavoidable contextual

relativism within an overarching Catholic identity, in creative and accommodating

tension.

When in a situation of historic and political privilege, Catholic identity is diluted into the

culture. This creates a blurry relationship that seems to invite laxity among relaxed

Catholics and zeal among concerned Catholics. Furthermore, in this case the Church has

the option of being condescending with non-Catholics at various degrees of ecumenical,

interreligious and inter-cultural flexibility or being intransigent even with Catholics, as

was the case during the Inquisition.

When in a position of being a minority religion, as in the American case, Catholic

identity tends to become highlighted and sharply defined in contrast to the host culture.

This creates a marked delimitation of boundaries that demands clearly identifiable

Catholic features against the religious others. But, at the same time, being a religious

minority may also open the door to learning about the religious others, comparing self to

11 Quoted by James H. Moynihan, The Life of Archbishop John Ireland, (New York: Harper and

Brothers Publishers, 1953) 44, note 21, La Revue Blue, Paris, November 16, 1895.

254

others, and even assimilating some acquirable elements from the host culture. This is

what happened to the Catholic Church in the United States. Reversely, in this case the

Church must have the humility to be counted among many and to join other religious

minorities when it asserts its right to exist and proclaim its message. This diversity of

positions is not only necessary but unavoidable within a Church whose definition is

precisely being Catholic—that is, universal—and that has become the largest and most

powerful religious institution in world history.

Tension is not only a feature of coexisting but differently located contexts. It is also a

feature of the relation between the past and the present, and between the present and the

future, with various accents and to different degrees. Tension similarly permeated the

Church’s relation to modernity, both against it during the twentieth century anti-

Modernist controversy and in favor of it in the context of the second Vatican Council.

The main challenge for the Church in its anti-Modernist struggle was that the modernist

enemy had managed to infiltrate within the fortress that the Church built around itself. In

that moment of time, Catholic modernists were a minority.12

The Second Vatican

Council was also marked by a strong diversity of opinions about where the Church was

heading in its effort to comply with the demands of modern times. In this case, however,

the opponents of aggiornamento were a minority among the Council Fathers.13

The shift

from minority to majority and vice versa suggests that tension is fluid and dynamic. A

paramount evidence of the Catholic embrace of ecclesial tension was the recent

simultaneous beatification of Pope Pius IX and Pope John XXIII, each of whom

embodied quite contrasting paradigms of Catholic understanding and authority.14

12 See Darrell Jodock, Catholicism contending with Modernity, Roman Catholic Modernism and

Anti-Modernism in Historical Context (Cambridge, UK; New York: Cambridge University Press,

2000).

13 See John W. O’Malley, What Happened at Vatican II (Cambridge, Mass: The Belknap Press of

Harvard University Press, 2008).

14 See John W. O’Malley, "The Beatification of Pope Pius IX: Do we judge Pius's conduct against

the standards of his day or ours?" America, Aug. 26 (2000): 6, accessed June 29, 2012,

http://www.americamagazine.org/content/article.cfm?article_id=2118.

255

This fluid tension was also at work in the United States during the time of Vatican II,

both between Church and American culture and within the Church itself. By the time of

the Centennial Parliament, the Catholic Church had become not only a religious

powerhouse in Chicago, but a critical player in the American culture wars. However,

despite its power, the Church continued to be one among many and it was as such that it

became involved in the 1993 Parliament of Religions. However, in this case the Church

participated as a majority religion sharing equal participation rights alongside the largest

conglomerate ever of minority religions, some of which had dubious credentials indeed

from a Catholic standpoint. To this kenotic tension of humbling itself as one among

many, a no longer invisible tension was at work within the Catholic Church. In addition

to its structurally diverse internal make-up (laity and clergy, bishops and lower clergy,

and the many different religious orders which claim a place within Catholic unity), the

Church was faced with publicly displaying its own internal tensions.

For example, Catholic women in full exercise of their theological credentials and

religious leadership, Catholics in dialogue with non-Catholic ideologies at work in places

like Latin America, Catholics lobbying for radical reform in the Church –such as

members of the radical group Call to Action, Catholics claiming a dual religious

identity—all of these claimed a voice and a cause at the 1993 Parliament. Even more

startling, perhaps, was the prominence of dissenters like Professor Hans Küng, the

architect of the most important official statement to come out of the Parliament –the

Declaration towards a Global Ethic. Küng had earned official disapproval as a Catholic

theologian; he was no longer accredited to teach Catholic theology in a seminary or

theology faculty approved by the hierarchy. Nevertheless, this widely read, admired and

quoted theologian was not excommunicated. He remained a Catholic and a priest in good

standing. The apparent ambiguity in the handling of Professor Küng’s case by Church

authorities offers new evidence of the fluidity of Catholic identity and equally adds to the

political and circumstantial dimensions of Catholic inclusion and exclusion. Other

theologians, past and present, have been excommunicated for lesser “transgressions” than

256

Küng’s.15

However, Küng has been “kept” inside the Church. The 1993 Parliament, like

no other event in the history of the Catholic Church, made this composite portrait of

internal Catholic diversity and tension possible and public in a given space and time.

But perhaps the most compelling evidence of the omnipresence and complexity of

diversity in the Catholic Church is what might be called “individual inner diversity,” as

displayed in the sometime contrasting positions manifested by individual Catholics.

There are those who promote a conservative stance on some issues such as liturgical and

devotional practices; at the same time they adopt a liberal position in other issues, such as

ethical and political matters. And this tension within Catholic individuals is also present

in the Church as a collective body. It is particularly evident in the modern Catholic

acceptance of the true and the good present in other religions, a new post-Conciliar

feature of official Catholic orthodoxy. All this suggests that it might be pointless to aspire

to a homogeneous Catholic identity while evidence points to a wide heterogeneous

spectrum within what is known as being Catholic today. The Catholic Church has a track

record of centuries in bringing together, synthesizing, and canonizing the most varied and

even opposite elements. At the same time, faithful to its doctrinal responsibility to

preserve the truth entrusted to her, the same Church has elaborate mechanisms for

safeguarding orthodoxy. Being Catholic is being in tension.

15 On the suspension of Küng’s teaching faculties, see Peter Hebblethwaite, The New Inquisition?

The Case of Edward Schillebeeckx & Hans Küng (San Francisco: Harper & Row Publichers,

1980). For a list of recent excommunications, see Pamela Schaeffer. "The most severe penalty has

a long history." National Catholic Reporter, Apr. 5, 1996: 5, GALE|A18202196. For the Call to

Action case in Nebraska, see Tom Carney, "Vatican upholds excommunication." National

Catholic Reporter, Dec. 22, 2006: 9, GALE|A157193911. For a treatment of the current

canonical practice, see Edward N. Peters, Excommunication and the Catholic Church: straight

answers to tough questions (West Chester, Pa.: Ascension Press, 2006).

257

The non-Catholic Other and the Chicago Parliaments of Religions

In Foucauldian terms, Catholic identity is also shaped in opposition to the religious other

and in response to non-Catholic perceptions of Catholics.16

In fact, there are some

religious groups, and specifically some Catholic associations, that often explain

themselves by stating what they are not rather than what they are.17

But who is the non-

Catholic other? The common ground, whether historic or doctrinal, that exists among

some religious groups allows for a model of concentric circles to serve as a helpful tool to

explain how they relate to each other in varying degrees of proximity and/or separation.18

In the case of the Catholic Church, the circles could begin with the Catholic Latin rite at

the center in relation to the Oriental Churches in communion with Rome in the immediate

circle around it, followed by the recent converts from the Anglican Church to the Roman

Church, who still honor their Anglican roots and heritage. What Oriental and Anglican

Catholics have in common is that they function under the authority of Rome while

acknowledging their distinct non-Roman history and exercising their liturgical and

canonical traditions. These first three circles comprise the current ritual diversity of the

Catholic Church.19

16 On Foucault’s notion of the formation of social identities, see Debbie Epstein and Richard

Johnson, Schooling Sexualities (Buckingham, UK: Open University Press, 1998), 33.

17 See Gordon Unquhart, The Pope’s Armada (London, Toronto: Bantam Press, 1995), 8.

18 For examples of the application of a concentric circles model to ecumenical and interfaith

relations, see Carlos Hugo Parra-Pirela, Who is my neighbour? A Window into the Interfaith

Experience and Potential of Member Churches of the Canadian Council of Churches (Toronto:

The Canadian Council of Churches, 2010), 16-17.75-76.

19 On the Eastern Catholic Churches, see Joan L. Roccasalvo, The Eastern Catholic churches: an

introduction to their worship and spirituality (Collegeville, Minn.: Liturgical Press, c1992).

There are other liturgical rites in Catholic history, such as the Mozarabic rite in Spain or the

Ambrosian rite in Milan, Italy, but both are considered part of the Latin rite of the Catholic

Church. There used to be specific rites in certain religious orders, such as the Carthusian,

Carmelite and the Dominican rites. With the exception of the Carthusian rite, still in existence,

these religious orders rites were abandoned as a result of the liturgical reforms decreed by the

Second Vatican Council.

258

The next circle would include the Orthodox tradition, which –strengthened by the

patronage of the Byzantine empire- developed parallel to the Roman Church and in

mutual communion with it for the first millennium. The Orthodox tradition includes the

ethnic and national Orthodox Churches derived from it. Orthodox Churches acknowledge

the primacy of honor of the ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople as a bond of pan-

Orthodox unity throughout the world while remaining autonomous in their governance.

The Catholic Church sees itself almost in total doctrinal agreement with the Orthodox

259

Churches.20

The following circle would comprise the ancient Churches of the East, some

of them known as the oriental Orthodox Churches, ( e.g. Coptic, Ethiopian, Syrian, and

Armenian), which, due to doctrinal differences and political circumstances, remained

independent since the early ecumenical councils. What all these Churches have in

common with the Roman Catholic Church is their historicity, their venerable traditions

preserved until the present time, and their undisputed right to claim a genuine and ancient

Christian identity.21

The next circle would be comprised by the churches and/or ecclesial communities that

broke with Rome as a result of the Reformation. What all the religious entities in this

circle have in common is that they share to varying degrees a past related to the Church

of Rome even if some of them have tried to deny it by bypassing the mediation of the

Roman factor and linking themselves to the early Apostolic Church.22

The first concentric circle beyond the realm of Christianity would be comprised by Jews,

who hold for Catholics the primacy among non-Christians, given the historic and

theological bond between Judaism and Christianity. The next circle would correspond to

Muslims, who believe in only one God and claim an Abrahamic heritage in the lineage of

Ishmael. The Second Vatican Council acknowledges that the One God to whom Muslims

surrender is equivalent to the Yahweh of the religion of Israel and the Father of the

Christian Holy Trinity.23

However, the Prophet Muhammad was not described by the

Council Fathers as the recipient of a new revelation from God. Judaism, Christianity, and

Islam have been grouped together as the monotheistic and Abrahamic traditions or as the

20 See Stephen F. Brown and Khaled Anatolios, Catholicism & Orthodox Christianity (New

York: Chelsea House, 2009).

21 See Aidan Nichols, Rome and the Eastern Churches: a study in schism (San Francisco, Calif.:

Ignatius Press, 2010).

22 This is the case of some Baptist churches.

23 See Declaration Nostra Aetate, 3.

260

religions of the Book, although not without reasonable objections from different sectors

within each of these faith communities.24

The next circles outward would include representatives of the so-called great religions of

the East, such as Buddhism and Hinduism, with which the Vatican has official dialogues

but whose frameworks are more distant from that of Catholicism, historically and

doctrinally. However, some common ground with the Catholic Church is to be found in

their mystical traditions, popular religiosity, and monastic institutions. Other outer circles

would comprise the less institutionalized aboriginal and native traditions and the so-

called nature religions in which the environment or its elements may be identified as

divine. Moreover, in recent times, agnostics and atheists have also taken part in interfaith

roundtables offering to articulate their position based on philosophy and science as valid

alternatives among the religious voices of the world. All these circles have in common

the search for answers to the perennial questions of the human existence: Who are we?,

Where do we come from?, What happens after we die?, What is the origin of the

universe?, Is there a God?, etc.25

This model of concentric circles is useful if one’s intention is to categorize who the

religious other is from a Roman Catholic theoretical, theological, and hierarchical

perspective. However, it could turn out very different if the center shifts. For instance, the

degrees of proximity and separation in other contexts may well be very different for a

Catholic in India surrounded by Hindus, Muslims, Sikhs, Buddhists, and Zoroastrians,

and a Catholic in Latin America, where religious diversity is articulated differently. In

other words, as Catholic identity itself is partially determined by specific contexts, the

religious other for Catholics is similarly contextualized.

24 See Jerald F. Dirks, The Abrahamic faiths: Judaism, Christianity, and Islam: similarities &

contrasts (Beltsville, Md.: Amana Publications, 2004).

25 See Gavin D'Costa, editor, The Catholic Church and the world religions: a theological and

phenomenological account (London : T&T Clark, 2011) and James L. Heft, editor, Catholicism

and interreligious dialogue (New York : Oxford University Press, 2012).

261

The immersion of the Catholic Church in the American context was what made possible

the involvement of the Catholic Church in the 1893 Parliament of Religions. In America,

the religious other for Catholics were the Protestants in their diverse forms and

denominations. They were rivals in the realm of religion, but they were bound in a

common citizenship. Here the Catholic Church was faced with a further tension, since

Protestants held much of the economic and political power in a nation where Catholics

were often looked upon with suspicion and disdain, particularly in nativist circles.

Furthermore, being American meant to seek freedom in the exercise of religion and

freedom from any state control of religious institutions. However, both practices were far

from Catholic thought at the time, which endorsed the notion that error had no rights and

was uneasy about the separation of Church and state.26

In the 1893 Columbian Exhibition the Catholic Church claimed its citizenship rights

among other Americans, but most of those Americans happened to be Protestants. In the

1893 Parliament of Religions, the Catholic Church claimed not only its religious rights

but its self-conceived religious supremacy and exclusivism among Protestants and

representatives of the religions of the world while at the same time the Church

acknowledged their right to exist within the religious freedom framework from which the

Catholic Church itself benefited in America.

Although the 1893 Parliament of Religions was meant to transcend the realm of inter-

Church relations by reaching out to non-Christian religions, for the Catholic Church it

really meant to stand side by side with its Protestant nemesis within the civilized

regulations imposed by the Parliament and required by religiously-free America. This

choice to “play by the rules” of the American democratic context alarmed some Catholics

both in America and Europe, who saw the Parliament as fraternizing with heretics and

capitulating the Catholic inherent right of religious supremacy and exclusivity. It was

wrong for the only true religion to mingle with error.

26 See Chester Gillis, Roman Catholicism in America (New York: Columbia University Press,

1999).

262

Catholic-Protestant interaction during of the 1893 Parliament also raised identity issues

not only for the Catholic Church but also for other Christians in relation to the Catholic

Church. One of these issues pertained to the Catholic identity of the Church of Rome as

conveyed in the complaint issued by the Archbishop of Canterbury about Catholics

claiming the title Catholic solely for themselves. For some Protestants, the real issue was

whether or not the Catholic Church could be considered Christian. More radical

Protestants had for generations described Catholicism in terms of idolatry rather than as

an older form of organized faith in Jesus Christ. More ecumenically-minded Protestants

were emphatic in acknowledging the continuing Christian character of the Roman

Catholic Church.27

While the Catholic Church’s identity was disputed among non-

Catholics, the Catholic Church was very clear about presenting itself as the only option as

far as true religion was concerned. This was clearly conveyed in the choice of converts

from Protestantism among the Catholic speakers at the Parliament and the active presence

in the event of the Paulist Fathers, established to bring Protestants to the Catholic faith in

the footsteps of the congregation’s founder. This sense of triumphalism was equally

challenged by Catholic convert Merwin-Marie Snell, responsible for the Scientific

Section of the Parliament, who became strongly drawn to the person and thought of

Swami Vivekananda.28

The 1893 Parliament of Religions has also been appraised as a most remarkable

ecumenical achievement before there was an ecumenical movement. This assertion

assumes the conventional agreement of considering the Edinburgh Missionary

Conference of 1910 as the foundational event of the ecumenical movement. However,

this understanding is totally Eurocentric and ignores the Chicago Parliament seventeen

27 For the Archbishop of Canterbury’s response to the Parliament, see John Henry Barrows,

editor, The World’s Parliament of Religions, an illustrated and popular story of the World’s First

Parliament of Religions held in Chicago in connections with the Columbian Exposition of 1893,

Volume I (Chicago: Parliament Publishing Company, 1893), 22-23. For positive Protestant

perceptions of Catholicism, see H. K. Carroll, “Our Attitude Toward Roman Catholics,”

Methodist Review, 11, March (1895).

28 Eric Ziolkowski, editor, A Museum of Faiths: Histories and Legacies of the 1893 World’s

Parliament of Religions (Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1993), 40.

263

years earlier as an undeniable evidence not only of the interfaith movement but of the

ecumenical movement at the non-institutional level, since most delegates attended the

Parliament as interested individuals and not as official representatives of their traditions.

But this was not the case with the Catholic Church. As the only Christian body officially

represented in the 1893 Parliament, the Catholic Church in the United States

unintentionally became a pioneer endorser of both the interfaith movement and the

ecumenical movement at the same time, despite its official withdrawal from both

movements a few years later as a result of formal advice from the Vatican.29

By the time of the Centennial Parliament in 1993, Catholics in the United States had

befriended their primary religious other from the past, that is Protestants and Jews, and

had constructive dialogue with people of other faiths as a result of the ecumenical and

interfaith relations encouraged by the Second Vatican Council. Many dioceses and the

National Conference of Catholic Bishops created official channels for such engagement

through the establishment of offices of ecumenical and interfaith relations. But the

Church remained cautious in conducting its ecumenical and interfaith activities for fear of

betraying its own self-understanding as the depository of the full truth of Christian

revelation. As an example, the Catholic Church has remained an observer and has never

applied for membership in the National Council of Churches of Christ in the USA or in

the World Council of Churches. On the other hand, in the United Kingdom and other

British Commonwealth countries,30

understandings have been reached that facilitate

Roman Catholic participation in the relevant national ecumenical councils. But at the

grassroots level an informal and powerful interaction between Catholics and people of

29 Pope Leo to Satolli, September 18, 1895, Archivio Segreto Vaticano (ASV), Segretaria di Stato

(SS), 1897, Rubric 280, Fasc. 4, p. 58, n. 26372.

30 In England, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand, the ecumenical councils of Churches have

restructured themselves and have adopted a forum model to make room for the Catholic Church

to become a full member and sponsor. This forum model allows the Catholic Church and other

member churches to abstain from endorsing certain pronouncements, primarily around sensitive

moral issues, about which the Catholic Church may have different normatives and opinions.

264

other faiths has unfolded. They are neighbors, classmates, co-workers and fellow

citizens—a familiarity that tends to soften inter-denominational tensions.

The Centennial Parliament provided the Catholic Church with the opportunity to

recognize its own struggle from the past in the new religious others in America, such as

the Vedantists, the Zoroastrians, and the Baha’is, which like Catholics of an earlier day

were attempting to find a place in the context of American religious pluralism. From its

new position of religious power and authority in America, the Catholic Church agreed to

work together with these minority religious groups without intending to convert them,

that is, in a genuine ecumenical spirit.31

In the face of the extraordinary and overwhelming religious diversity displayed at the

Parliament, American Catholics proved more elastic than their Orthodox brethren, who

withdrew from the Parliament in protest against the inclusion of new religious

movements that upheld polytheism and/or pantheism.32

However, there was discomfort if

not tension among some Catholics regarding the religious diversity at the Parliament. In a

phone conversation with the writer, Archbishop Francesco Gioia, the Vatican delegate at

the Parliament, pointed out his perplexity at running into living founders of new religions

everywhere at the Palmer House in Chicago. Another challenge for Catholics was the

presence of former Catholics, some of them former priests or nuns, among the Parliament

presenters.33

But perhaps the most compelling confrontation of Catholic identity with its religious

other was to see this other reflected when looking at oneself in the mirror. This was the

31 Cardinal Bernardin to Gómez-Ibáñez, June 21, 1989, Archives of the Council for a Parliament

of the World’s Religions (ACPWR), Box9, General Parliament Correspondence, Folder: June

1989, 1 of 2.

32 Statement by Chair David Ramage concerning Orthodox Withdrawal, ACPWR, Box6B, Board

of Trustees, Folder: Board of Trustees Statements concerning Jewish and Christian Orthodox

Withdrawal, August September 1993.

33 Parliament of the World´s Religions Program Catalogue (Chicago: Council for a Parliament of

the World´s Religions, 1993), 104, 90, 118. From now on, PWRPC.

265

case of multiple religious identities embodied in figures like Father Bede Griffiths and

Professor Raymond Panikkar, or Aboriginal Catholics.34

This recognition of the religious

other as inherent to a specific and historically defined religious identity may well be more

natural than exceptional from a comparative standpoint due to the borrowings and the

fluidity that have circulated throughout the genealogical tree of religions across the

centuries. In the case of Christianity, and specifically of the Catholic Church, a DNA test

would easily reveal the selective appropriation of elements from other religious and

cultural traditions, first from the religion of Israel, later from the Greco-Roman world,

and even from post-Christian Islam. In regards to Islam, there are serious hypotheses

about the influence of Sufi mysticism, particularly the school of the pure love of God

(that is, loving God neither out of interest in the heavenly rewards nor out of fear of

eternal damnation but for the sake of God Godself) in Spanish Catholic mystics such as

Teresa of Avila and John of the Cross.35

In relation to the Neo-Pagan groups present at the Parliament, perhaps the Catholic

Church had more in common with them from a religious phenomenology standpoint than

anybody might think. Ironically, the danger of religious syncretism that the Catholic

Church has so adamantly identified as a distorted outcome of interfaith relations may be a

constitutive element of the ages-old and slowly seasoned Catholic identity, particularly in

the earliest formative years of Christianity.36

But the Catholic Church has managed to re-

interpret and elevate this syncretism to a whole new level of doctrinal orthodoxy and

ecclesiastical canonicity. This adventurous statement should not necessarily sound

34 See Shirley du Boulay, Beyond the Darkness: A Biography of Bede Griffiths (New Alresford,

Hampshire: John Hunt Publishing, 2004); http://raimon-panikkar.org, accessed June 29, 2012;

and Christopher Vecsey, Mark G. Thiel, Marie Therese Archambault, editors, The crossing of two

roads : being Catholic and Native in the United States (Maryknoll, New York : Orbis Books,

2003).

35 See Luce López-Baralt, Huellas del Islam en la Literatura Española, De Juan Ruiz a Juan

Goytisolo (Madrid: Hiperion, 1985). Chapter V relates specifically to the Sonet “No me mueve,

mi Dios, para quererte,” 99-117.

36 See Philippe Walter, Christianity: the origins of a pagan religion, trans. Jon E. Graham

(Rochester, Vt.: Inner Traditions, 2006).

266

alarming or disrespectful of the integrity of Catholic dogma. On the contrary, it is totally

consistent with the doctrine of Vatican II that acknowledges the true and the good that

exist in other religions, a doctrine as old in Christian thought as St. Justin the Apologist in

the second century C.E.37

It is precisely those true and good inputs coming from other

traditions and compatible with Christian revelation that the Church may look at and

recognize as its own. This awareness may also make the Catholic Church more capable

of engaging the religious other from its own internal composite nature. At the same time,

the awareness of religious and cultural borrowing may be instrumental in acknowledging

more easily what is and should remain essential in Catholic faith and practice and what is

and should remain accidental and therefore subject to change. As a result, the Church

might become less concerned about orthodoxy and more vigilant about orthopraxis in

imitation of its Master and Lord.

There is yet another subtle but powerful area of identification between Catholics and the

religious other in what could be called “trans-denominational philosophical and political

empathy.” There is evidence of Catholics pushed to the margins by Church doctrine on

controversial issues, such as gender equality or sexual orientation, finding common

ground and mingling with non-Catholics equally pushed to the margins by their religious

denominations on the same issues. At the grassroots level, they are brought together by

exclusion. Similarly, at the other end of the ideological spectrum, Catholics striving for

the preservation of the traditional role of the family or fighting against abortion make

subtle or overt alliances with conservatives in other Christian denominations and non-

Christian religions to further their common cause. In either case, tradition or change

become magnets for a highly polarized political ecumenism.

37 See Declaration Nostra Aetate, 2. See also André Wartelle, editor, Apologies, Saint Justine:

introduction, text critique, translation, commentary and index (Paris: Études augustiniennes,

1987).

267

Catholic interfaith relations at the Chicago Parliaments of

Religions

The tension experienced by the Catholic Church regarding its own identity and the

identity of the non-Catholic other is naturally transferred into the arena of Catholic

interfaith relations. The primary tension in this realm is between the missionary mandate

of Christianity so prominent in the Gospels (“Go and make disciples of all peoples,

baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit”38

) and

in the epistles of Paul and the respect and recognition of the true and the good present in

non-Christian religions as affirmed in the Second Vatican Council.39

As a result of the

Council, the Catholic Church has entered into formal dialogue with non-Christian

religions and established official channels to conduct such dialogues at the local, national,

and global levels. However, the Catholic dialogue with other religions unfolds in various

forms. Without any order of priority, they are known as the dialogue of life, the dialogue

of action, the dialogue of theological exchange, and the dialogue of religious

experience.40

The dialogue of life refers to the ongoing interaction with people of other religious

traditions in the contexts of life: neighborhood, school, workplace and other

environments. This dialogue of life is almost unavoidable in highly multicultural and

pluri-religious locations. This dialogue supposes an attitude of openness and respect for

38 Matthew 28:19.

39 The relationship between the missionary mandate of the Catholic Church and the Church’s

commitment to interfaith dialogue was addressed by Pope John Paul the second in his encyclical

letter Redemptoris Missio, December 7, 1990.

40 Two Vatican documents state this typology of dialogue: Dialogue and Mission, May 10, 1984,

by the Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue, and Dialogue and Proclamation, May 19,

1991, issued jointly by the same Council and the Sacred Congregation for the Evangelization of

Peoples. See Francesco Gioia, editor, Interreligious Dialogue: The Official Teaching of the

Catholic Church (Boston: Pauline, 2006), 1125-1126, 1171.

268

religious diversity and an acknowledgment of the common humanity across religious

traditions.

The dialogue of action, also known as the dialogue of work, refers to collaboration

between Christians and people of other religions in pursuit of common objectives in

humanitarian, social, economic and political realms. Natural disasters, epidemics,

poverty, or war may bring people together –regardless of their religious identity- in

solidarity with those in need. Most religious traditions consider this outreach to those in

need as an essential way of translating their beliefs into action, whether the resulting

action is described as creating good karma, the practice of compassion, the works of

mercy, or the exercise of almsgiving.

The dialogue of theological exchange, also known as the dialogue of experts, refers to the

interaction among scholars in relation to the tenets of their respective religious beliefs

and practices, seeking to present and explain their own and to learn about and understand

the others’. This form of dialogue can be rather sophisticated given the level of expertise

at which it is sometimes carried out. Theological dialogue seeks out and acknowledges

any theoretical and practical common ground between the religious traditions involved.

However, it does not hesitate to explore also their sharp and sometimes irreconcilable

differences, particularly at the doctrinal or dogmatic level. The dialogue of theological

exchange is expected to safeguard the integrity of the religious traditions involved

through a delicate balance of self-affirmation on the one hand, and on the other hand by a

conscious eagerness to be inspired by the insights and virtues discovered in the dialogue

partner or partners.

The dialogue of the religious experience refers to sharing ways of seeking, encountering,

and approaching the divine according to the specificity of each religious tradition. This

pertains to different forms of prayer, meditation, and contemplation. While this form of

dialogue is certainly possible among the laity, it acquires a heightened character when it

takes place among those in various religious traditions who have dedicated themselves to

a life consecrated to prayer, particularly in the monastic context.

269

These four forms of dialogue found expression to varying degrees at the Chicago

Parliaments of Religions, and specifically in relation to the Catholic Church. Regarding

the dialogue of life, the involvement of the Catholic Church in the 1893 Parliament was

obviously a concrete acknowledgement of the non-Catholic other present in America and

elsewhere in the world. This was particularly relevant given the centuries-old history of

hostility between Catholics and Protestants globally and in the United States. In the 1993

Parliament the Catholic Church portrayed itself as a primary interlocutor in the American

interreligious exchange given its prominence in all spheres of society. Both Parliaments

became an intentional community for the dialogue of life.

In relation to the dialogue of action, the 1893 Parliament set among its goals “to discover

what light Religion has to throw on problems of the current age, such as temperance,

labor, education, wealth, poverty… and to foster international peace.” Cardinal Gibbons

echoed this mandate in his presentation about the needs of humanity supplied by the

Catholic Church. 41

From a Catholic perspective, attention to social issues was relevant,

since Pope Leo XIII, just two years before the first Parliament, had addressed the social

question in his groundbreaking encyclical Rerum Novarum, the foundational document of

the modern social doctrine of the Catholic Church. In this same spirit, the Centennial

Parliament proved a powerful venue for global and development themes, addressing

issues such as Aboriginal rights, justice for the poor, peace for the world, and ecological

awareness. Each of these themes engaged Catholics at the Parliament. Particularly

noticeable were Bishop Samuel Ruiz, leading the indigenous-populated diocese of

Chiapas in Mexico, Bishop Willie Romelus, from poverty-stricken Haiti, Father Thomas

Kocherry on development in India, and Fr. Thomas Berry on the environment.42

Pertaining to the dialogue of theological exchange, in 1893 distinguished scholars of

religion attended or sent papers to be read to the Parliament. These included Catholics

such as Monsignor D’Harlez of France, an expert in the Zoroastrian religion from the

41 Barrows, The World’s Parliament of Religions, I, 14, 18.

42 PWRPC, 133, 22, 83, 85.

270

University of Louvain, and Merwin-Marie Snell, secretary of Bishop Keane and president

of the Scientific Section.43

It has been argued that –given the format of the program as a

sequence of lectures- no formal dialogue ever took place. American religious history

scholar Martin Marty writes that “instead of dialogue a succession of monologues had

occurred.”44

However, while Marty is correct about the format adopted by the Parliament

program, interaction among the participants did take place and was recorded in Barrows

proceedings. Barrows affirms that “the Parliament was not a place for the suppression of

opinions but for their frankest utterance, and what made it so supremely successful was

mutual tolerance, extraordinary courtesy and unabated goodwill.” Furthermore, Barrows

also states that inquiry rooms were set apart by Catholics and Buddhists.45

The 1993

Centennial exuded dialogue everywhere, particularly in the many interfaith panels

throughout the program. Of special significance was the session organized by Buddhist

and Catholic monks of the Monastic Interfaith Dialogue to reflect upon the Buddhist

concept of emptiness and the parallel Christian concept of kenosis.46

Prior to the event,

the international consultation conducted by Küng from Europe and the local consultation

conducted by the Council in Chicago on the text of a proposed Declaration on a Global

Ethic constituted another form of theological dialogue. Unfortunately, this pre-Parliament

dialogue concerning the declaration did not continue into the Parliament, which was a

chief reason why many leaders refused to endorse the document.

Regarding the dialogue of religious experience, although there was no Catholic

presentation on prayer or spirituality at the 1893 event, perhaps something more relevant

43 John Henry Barrows, editor,The World’s Parliament of Religions, an illustrated and popular

story of the World’s First Parliament of Religions held in Chicago in connections with the

Columbian Exposition of 1893, Volume II (Chicago: Parliament Publishing Company, 1893),

1573.

44 Martin E. Marty, “A Cosmopolitan Habit in Theology,” in A Museum of Faiths: Histories and

Legacies of the 1893 World’s Parliament of Religions, ed. Eric Ziolkowski, (Atlanta: Scholars

Press, 1993), 170.

45 Barrows, The World’s Parliament of Religions, II, 1560, 1559.

46 PWRPC, 62.

271

did take place. The Parliament convened each morning with the recitation of the Lord’s

Prayer, recited on the first day by Cardinal Gibbons himself as the presider of the

inaugural session.47

But for Catholics, praying together with non-Catholics was regarded

as communicatio in sacris, something to be avoided. The 1993 Parliament overflowed

with sessions on religious experience. Catholics spoke about spirituality, meditation, and

mysticism. Therefore, both Parliaments offered the Catholic Church and the other

participants the opportunity to actively engage in all four forms of dialogue.

Despite the different historical circumstances surrounding the two Parliaments of

Religions, in each case Parliament organizers could not have afforded to hold the event

without the involvement of the Catholic Church. But neither could the Catholic Church

afford to be absent from the Parliaments. From the Parliament of Religions’ perspective,

no interfaith initiative with global claims would be taken seriously without the presence

of the Catholic Church, the largest religious body in the world and one of the most

ancient forms of Christianity. From the Catholic Church’s standpoint, the 1893

Parliament provided the Church with an opportunity to step forward center stage in

America at a time when its compatibility with American democracy was questioned by

some of its own members and by external critics. Regarding the 1993 Parliament, the

Church’s own pastoral responsibility to other religions and the world at large compelled

it not only to have its voice heard and its message proclaimed but also to enter into

dialogue with other religions in the largest interreligious forum in contemporary history.

In spite of the importance of Catholic participation in both Parliaments, the Catholic

Church was just one player among many. This was one of the reasons that moved Vatican

Apostolic Delegate Francesco Satolli to suggest to the Vatican Catholic withdrawal from

such events following the 1893 Parliament. His request was granted and the Pope

formally advised that no further Catholic interfaith involvement should be undertaken

47 Barrows, The World’s Parliament of Religions, II, 1560; James Cleary, “Catholic Participation

in the World’s Parliament of Religions,” The Catholic Historical Review, 55, 4 (1970): 505.

272

unless the Church was the organizing body and host.48

This was precisely what John Paul

II did in Assisi and what Cardinal Bernardin tried unsuccessfully to do in Chicago around

the centennial: to convene and host.49

But the Catholic Church could not spark a

centennial event. Instead the little religions of Chicago were the ones able to bring the

Parliament Centennial idea to fruition. This meant that the Church would neither be the

sole organizer nor the only host, but a partner and a co-host among many. Furthermore,

the multilateral interfaith experience offered by the centennial Parliament was unique for

the Catholic Church, which tends to favor bilateral over multilateral interfaith interaction

so as to engage in a more focused and controlled dialogue. Bilateral dialogue unfolds

between two centers, while the Parliament experience involved multiple centers. For the

Catholic Church this meant framing itself within a context in which it was neither the

first nor the last religion. The traditions represented at the Centennial Parliament had

either preceded the Catholic Church, and were still alive and vigorous, or had come after

it in the millenary course of the history of religions.

Interestingly, the multilateral character of the centennial Parliament was also mirrored in

the way the Catholic Church decided to endorse the event. The Church came on board

together with other members of the Council of Religious Leaders of Metropolitan

Chicago, a remarkable example of ecumenical teamwork for an interreligious cause.50

The multilateral character of the Parliament was further complexified by the fact that the

Catholic Church had to deal not only with the many religious traditions represented at the

Council but with the Council itself. An interesting development of some interfaith

initiatives and organizations is that they may acquire and develop some of the features of

48 Satolli to Rampolla, August 12, 1895, ASV, SS, 1990, Rubric 248, Fasc. 1, p. 60, n. 26372.

49 On Cardinal Bernardin’s unsuccessful attempts to launch a centennial commemoration, see

Lawrence to Kenney and Gómez-Ibáñez, June 17, 1989, ACPWR, Box 5, “The Council” (1983-

1989), Folder: Council Meeting Correspondence, January-August 1989, and Lawrence’s

chronology of events, May 14, 1988, ACPWR, Box 9, General Parliament Correspondence,

Folder: May-August 1988.

50 See Shaalman to Nolley, May 9, 1989, ACPWR, Box 5, The “Council” (1983-1989), Folder:

Council Meeting Correspondence, January-August 1989.

273

its member bodies –including fundraising- becoming almost a religion themselves. The

Council’s ways of proceeding also implied that the Catholic Church had less control over

the general program or the participation of individual Catholics, some of whom were

invited by non-Catholic organizers or simply invited themselves as independent

presenters. This made possible the wide spectrum of Catholic voices heard at the

Parliament, which no strictly Catholic venue could have afforded to have.

All this meant that the Catholic Church had traveled a long way in the course of the one

hundred years separating the Chicago Parliaments of Religions. The Church framed its

participation in the 1893 Parliament under the assumption that Catholicism was the only

true religion, the classical exclusivist position. After Vatican II acknowledged the true

and the good present in other religions, the Church became involved in the 1993

Parliament under the still condescending assumption that it was the best religion, if not

the sole possessor of truth, the classical inclusivist position. However, what the Church

found, perhaps inadvertently, as a result of its insertion into the Centennial Parliament

process was that it had agreed to operate within a truly pluralistic framework. At the 1993

Parliament, the Church stood neither as the only true religion nor as the best religion, but

just one religion among many and an equal partner with them in working towards the

Parliament objectives.51

The two Parliaments of Religions were also a public square in which the Catholic Church

exposed itself to scrutiny by other religions and society at large. The request of Chicago

Methodist minister John Lee to Pope Leo XIII to support religious freedom for

Protestants in Catholic Latin America in consistency with the freedom Catholics enjoyed

in America is but one of the unintended consequences of such public exposure in 1893.52

The aboriginal initiative calling upon Pope John Paul II to nullify the Bull Inter Cetera

51 On these three different paradigms, see John Hick and Paul F. Knitter, editors, The Myth of

Christian Uniqueness, Toward a Pluralistic Theology of Religions (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books,

1988).

52 See Lee to Satolli, July 12, 1894, and and Lee to Pope Leo XIII, August 24, 1894, Archivio

Storico de Propaganda Fide, Nuova Serie, Volume 36, pages. 79 and 64.

274

which endorsed the right of the European powers to colonize the New World is a similar

example from the 1993 Centennial.53

Finally, the global character of the Chicago Parliaments offers insights into Catholic

tension between the local and the global. The interpretation of the Centennial Parliament

as a local event made Cardinal Bernardin the chief Catholic officer and responsible for

Catholic involvement in the event. This also meant that his ecumenical vision and

commitment sustained Catholic participation. But beyond its local character, the

Centennial Parliament also provided a unique opportunity for an encounter of globalities.

If globalness was a criterion for religious validation, then competing global visions

displayed by many of the religions represented at the Parliament meant a new framework

for dialogue between the global and the global, a space for the world religions to interact.

The global character of the Chicago Parliaments also opened new ways of inquiry about

the perennial relation between religion and culture in relation to the Catholic Church.

While the 1893 Parliament proved an opportunity for the Church to affirm its

compatibility with America, the 1993 Parliament confronted the American Catholic

Church with the challenges posed by religious diversity within the context of

multiculturalism. This meant a pluralization of the classical binary relation between

religion and culture. In the face of this pluralization, a new formula is called for that may

allow many religions to relate to many cultures, and allow the Catholic Church to interact

in a multi-centered post-modern framework.

But above all, the involvement of the Catholic Church in the Chicago Parliaments of

Religions meant for the Catholic Church an opportunity to enact the most basic tenet of

its dogma: the kenosis, that is the incarnation of God, the emptying of the divine into the

humility of the human condition.54

Faced with the temptation of attaching itself to

53 Relazione di Mons. Francesco Gioia in merito alla sua presenza al Parlamento delle Religioni

(Chicago, 28.8-4.9.1993). Courtesy of the Pontifical Council of Interreligious Dialogue, Vatican

City.

54 Philippians 2:6.

275

accidental things, the Catholic Church was summoned by the Chicago Parliaments of

Religions to focus on what is essential and truly necessary. Faced with the temptation of

exercising its own power to showcase its claims of exclusivity or superiority, the Church

was reduced to act as one among many. Faced with the temptation of worshipping itself

as an idol competing with the same God it intended to serve, the Catholic Church was

reminded that it is not an end in itself, but an instrument at the service of the Kingdom.55

55 See the temptations of Jesus in the desert in the Gospel according to Matthew 4:1-11, and in the

Gospel according to Luke 4:1-13.

276

“What remains of the world of deeds is the world of words”

A historiography summary of

the Catholic Church and the Parliaments of Religions1

At the time of the 1893 Parliament, Max Müller was working on his monumental “The

Sacred Books of the East,” a fifty-volume project designed to make the writings of

ancient Asian religions accessible to the English speaking world. When writing about the

Parliament, Müller referred to it as “the world of deeds” and he compared the Parliament

to his own work in “the world of words,” which he called “a more authoritative

parliament” of religions, because “in the end what remains of the world of deeds is the

world of words or, as we call it, History.”2. These pages are a cartographic attempt to

map the historiographical journey during which Catholic involvement in the first

Parliament of Religions and its centennial transmigrated from the world of deeds into the

world of words.

The 1893 Parliament of Religions

Regrettably, most of the key words concerning the 1893 Parliament are lost. Catholic

historian James Cleary, reports that the extant collection of the original records and

papers related to the Columbian Exposition and its Auxiliary was destroyed by the

Chicago Public Library for lack of storage space. He adds that the personal

correspondence of Barrows was also destroyed in a 1923 fire at their family home in

California. Only a copy of the Programme has been preserved in the Library of the

1 This is an abbreviated version of my 55-page unpublished essay “The Chicago Parliaments of

Religions and the Catholic Church: A Historiographical Journey,” (2012) composed as part of

this doctoral research project. 2 Friedrich Max Müller, “The Real Significance of the Parliament of Religions,” in A Museum of

Faiths: Histories and Legacies of the 1893 World’s Parliament of Religions, ed. Eric Ziolkowski,

(Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1993), 156.158.

277

Chicago Historical Society.3 Because of this, the only primary source left are the

Parliament proceedings. These include three acknowledged collections of the Parliament

speeches edited by John Barrows (1893), Walter Houghton (1894), and I. Hanson

(1894).4 The first two are considered by Parliament scholar Richard Seager as more

authoritative than the third.5 There are also two other collections of Parliament speeches

by Jenkin Lloyd Jones (1893) and C. M. Stevans (1894), surprisingly overlooked by

previous Parliament scholars.6 Among these, Richard Seager stands out as the scholar

most versed in the Parliament, one of only three who have written doctoral dissertations

on the event7 and one of only two who have penned a whole book exclusively on the

subject (the other is Lancaster).8 Seager is referred to as “one of the most astute observers

3 James Cleary, “Catholic Participation in the World’s Parliament of Religions,” The Catholic

Historical Review, 55, 4 (1970): 589. 597, notes 15 and 48.

4 John Henry Barrows, editor, The World’s Parliament of Religions, an illustrated and popular

story of the World’s First Parliament of Religions held in Chicago in connections with the

Columbian Exposition of 1893, Volumes I and II (Chicago: Parliament Publishing Company,

1893); Walter Houghton, editor, Neely’s History of the Parliament of Religions and Religious

Congresses of the World’s Columbian Exposition: Compiled from Original Manuscripts and

Stenographic Reports (Chicago: F. T. Neely, 1894); J.W. Hanson, editor, The world's congress of

religions : the addresses and papers delivered before the parliament, and a abstract of the

congresses held under the auspices of the World's Columbian exposition (Chicago: Webb, 1894).

5 Richard Seager, editor, Dawn of Religious Pluralism: Voices from the World’s Parliament of

Religion, 1893 (La Salle, Ill.: Open Court, 1999),1.

6 Jenkin Lloyd Jones, editor, A chorus of faith: as heard in the Parliament of Religions, held in

Chicago, Sept. 10-27, 1893 (Chicago: Unity Publishing Company, 1893); C.M. Stevans, editor,

The World's Congress of Religions [microform]: being a complete and concise history of the most

inspiring convocation of civilization, wherein was given full expression to the irrefutable

evidence establishing the independence of mind and the supremacy of human conscience

(Chicago : Laird & Lee, 1894).

7 The other two are Kenten Druyvesteyn, The World’s Parliament of Religions. Thesis (Ph.D.)--

University of Chicago, Divinity School, March 1976, and Carroll Fisher, Interfaith Dialogue at

the 1893 and 1993 Parliaments of the World's Religions, Thesis (Ph. D.)--Dissertation Abstracts

International; 2001, Vol. 61 Issue 12.

8 Clay Lancaster, Incredible World’s Parliament of Religions at the Chicago Columbian

Exposition of 1893: A Comparative and Critical Study (Fontwell: Diane Pub Co., 1987).

278

of the Parliament during the centennial period.”9 His scholarly engagement with the

Parliament can be traced over a decade, starting with his 1987 doctoral dissertation

research at Harvard University.10

Other significant 1893 Parliament scholars are Clay

Lancaster, Eric Ziolkowski, and John Burris.11

The participation of the Catholic Church in the first Parliament of Religions has received

limited attention in Catholic historiography. Historian James Cleary stands out. His

article “Catholic Participation in the World’s Parliament of Religions” (1970) is the most

extensive and comprehensive treatment of the subject.12

Cleary speculates on the

importance of the archives of the Propaganda Fide in Rome. Propaganda Fide was the

agency for foreign missions through which all the affairs of the Catholic Church in North

America were dealt with at the time. Unfortunately for Cleary, when he did his research

in the late 1960s, the archives were not open for the period of the 1893 Parliament.

Cleary suspected that complaints from conservative Catholics in America regarding

Church participation in the Parliament were to be found there.

In my own research forty years after Cleary’s article, I found that specific information

about the 1893 Parliament at the Propaganda Fide Archives is minimal, limited to the

Minutes of the Meeting of the American Archbishops in which the prelates made the

decision that the Catholic Church would be represented in the event and a one-paragraph

report on the Parliament in a letter from Archbishop Francesco Satolli to the Prefect of

9 Catherine Albanese and Stephen J. Stein, foreword to The World’s Parliament of Religions, The

East/West Encounter, Chicago, 1893, by Richard Hugues Seager (Bloomington: Indiana

University Press, 1995), ix.

10 Richard Hughes Seager, The World’s Parliament of Religions, Chicago, Illinois,

1893: America’s religious coming of age. Thesis (Ph. D.)--Harvard University, 1987.

11 Eric Ziolkowski, editor, A Museum of Faiths: Histories and Legacies of the 1893 World’s

Parliament of Religions (Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1993); John P. Burris, Exhibiting Religion,

Colonialism and Spectacle at International Expositions 1851-1893 (Charlottesville: University

Press of Virginia, 2001).

12 James Cleary, “Catholic Participation in the World’s Parliament of Religions,” The Catholic

Historical Review, 55, 4, (1970).

279

the Congregation, Cardinal Mieczyslaw Ledóchwski, sent shortly after the event. But the

Propaganda Fide Archives do house insightful materials about the Catholic Educational

Exhibit and the Columbian Catholic Congress, both related to the Chicago World’s Fair.

Included are a letter from New York’s Archibishop Corrigan to Cardinal Ledochowski

praising the success of the Catholic Educational Exhibit and the Official Call and

Programme of the Columbian Catholic Congress by its main organizer, William Onahan.

The Propaganda archives also provide ample evidence of tensions within the American

hierarchy, specifically between New York Archbishop Corrigan and Vatican Apostolic

Delegate Francesco Satolli, and between Rochester Bishop Bernard McQuaid and St.

Paul’s Archbishop John Ireland. These archives also offer materials on the impact that the

involvement of the Catholic Church in the Columbian celebrations in Chicago had on the

Protestant perception of Catholics as well as the results of that shift in perception,

including an appeal from the Methodist ministers of Chicago calling on Pope Leo XIII to

intervene on behalf of threatened Protestant minorities in South America. Equally helpful

in putting the implications of Catholics mingling with Protestants in Chicago into

perspective was archival material on the controversy surrounding Catholic participation

in the ceremonies organized in India concerning the crowning of Edward VII as king of

England and Emperor of India.13

Although not considered by Cleary, another important Vatican source on the Parliament

is the Secret Archives. In addition to the known report of Cardinal Gibbons to Vatican

Secretary of State Cardinal Mariano Rampolla, a copy of which is in the archives of the

Archdiocese of Baltimore, I discovered limited correspondence between John Henry

Barrows and Cardinal Rampolla that included Barrow’s first report on the Parliament

planning process. The Secret Archives also contain the minutes of most Annual

Conferences of the American Archbishops after the Parliament which, surprisingly,

contain no references to the Parliament. But a very important document in the Secret

13 On the Propaganda Fide Archives, see Antonine Tisebar, O.F.M., introduction to United States

Documents in the Propaganda Fide Archives, A Calendar, Volume One, ed. Finbar Kenneally,

O.F.M. (Washington, D.C.: Academy of American Franciscan History, 1966), xi-xvi.

280

Archives is a letter in the correspondence between Archbishop Satolli and Cardinal

Rampolla asking the Holy See to make a formal pronouncement regarding Catholic

participation in any subsequent non-Catholic religious congresses. Satolli’s letter in

Italian is filed next to a response by Pope Leo XII in Latin, advising no further

involvement of Catholics in such events. The Pope’s letter is almost a word-for-word

translation of Satolli’s letter. Satolli’s request arrived in Rome just in time for the Vatican

to address another issue about which there is rich documentation in the Secret Archives:

the unsuccessful plan to hold a Parliament of Religions in Paris in 1900 and the prospect

of Catholic involvement in it, certainly a result of the Chicago initiative.14

Before Cleary’s article, references to the Parliament in Catholic historiography are short

and limited primarily to passing mention in the biographies and published

correspondence of American prelates involved in the Parliament or opposed to it, and in

the histories of the institutions or movements with which they were associated. These

include: The life and letters of Bishop McQuaid by Federick Zwerlein (1927); The

Catholic University of America, 1887-1896: the rectorship of John J. Keane (1948) and

The Life of John J. Keane: educator and archbishop, 1839-1918 (1955) by Patrick

Ahern; The Life of James Cardinal Gibbons, Archbishop of Baltimore, 1834-1931 by

John Tracy Ellis (1952); The Life of Archbishop Ireland by James Moynihan (1953); The

Great Crisis in American Catholic History 1895-1959 by Thomas McAvoy (1957); and

The Emergence of Liberal Catholicism in America by Robert Cross (1958). References to

the Parliament are even more limited in general surveys of the history of the Catholic

Church in the United States by John Tracy Ellis, American Catholicism (1969), and

Thomas McAvoy, A History of the Catholic Church in the United States (1969), Catholic

historians at the Catholic University of America and the University of Notre Dame

respectively.15

14 On the Vatican Secret Archives, see Maria Luisa Ambrosini, The Secret Archives of the

Vatican (London: Eyre & Spottiswoode, 1969).

15 Frederick J. Zwierlein, The Life and Letters of Bishop McQuaid (Rochester: The art Print

Shop), Three volumes. Volume I, 1925, Volume II, 1926, Vol. III, 1927; Patrick Henry Ahern,

281

Cleary’s article remains the most cited Catholic study of the 1893 Parliament and

referenced in: The Vatican and the Americanist Crisis: Denis J. O’Connell, American

Agent in Rome, 1985-1903 (1974) and The Vatican and the American Hierarchy, 1870-

1965 (1985) by Gerald Fogarty; American Catholics: a history of the Roman Catholic

community in the United States by James Hennesey (1981); The American Catholic

Experience (1985) and “Catholic Attitudes towards Protestants” (1987) by Jay P. Dolan;

The Catholic University of America, A Centennial History by C. Joseph Nuesse (1990);

and Catholics in America by Patrick Carey (2004). Three notable exceptions are Dennys

Downey (1981), Dennis McCann (1991), and Angelyn Dries (2002), who wrote papers

treating the Parliament at a greater length.16

However, their works are not close to

supplanting Cleary’s article as the most authoritative study on Catholic participation in

the 1893 Parliament. A European body of literature, primarily French, touches indirectly

on the 1893 Parliament when addressing the Americanist controversy. The most relevant

among these sources is Albert Houtin’s L'américanisme (1904), which devotes a full

The Catholic University of America 1887-1896, The Rectorship of John J. Keane (Washington,

DC: The Catholic University of America Press, 1948); Patrick Henry Ahern, The Life of John J.

Keane, Educator and Archbishop, 1839-1918, (Milwakee : The Bruce Publishing Company,

1955); John Tracy Ellis, The Life of James Cardinal Gibbons, Archbishop of Baltimore, Volume

II (Milwaukee: The Bruce Publishing Company, 1952); James H. Moynihan, The Life of

Archbishop John Ireland, (New York: Harper and Brothers Publishers, 1953); Thomas T.

McAvoy, C.S.C., The Americanist Heresy in Roman Catholicism, 1895-1900 (Notre Dame, Ind.:

University of Notre Dame Press, 1963); Robert D. Cross, The emergence of liberal Catholicism

in America (Cambridge, Mass., Harvard University Press, 1958); John Tracy Ellis, American

Catholicism (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, c1956); Thomas T. McAvoy, C.S.C., A

History of the Catholic Church in the United States (Notre Dame, Ind.: University of Notre Dame

Press, 1969). 16

Dennis B. Downey, “Tradition and Acceptance: American Catholics and the Columbian

Exposition,” Mid America, An Historical Review, 63, 2 (1981): 82; Dennis P. McCann,

“Catholics at the Parliament: An Americanist Breakthrough,” unpublished paper presented at the

American Academy of Religion Annual Meeting, Section: The 1893 Parliament of Religions:

New Voices from the Margins, 22-23 November, 1991, in Archives of the Council for a

Parliament of the World’s Religions (ACPWR), Box 21A, File McCann; Angelyn Dries, OSF,

‘American Catholics and World Religions, Theory and Practice: 1893-1959, American Catholic

Studies, 113, 1-2 (2002): 31-50.

282

chapter to the Chicago event.17

The general historiography of the 1893 Parliament also

offers some glimpses of the Catholic participation. See for example the Parliament’s

proceedings and the works of the 1893 Parliament scholars.18

The 1993 Parliament of Religions

Judging by the literature, the 1993 Parliament caused less scholarly interest than the first

one did. The 1993 gathering came late in a world where interfaith initiatives had already

developed extensively. Unquestionably, the singularly most important historical research

sources on the 1993 Parliament of Religions are to be found in the Archives of the

Council for a Parliament of the World’s Religions. In sharp contrast with the 1893

Parliament, the centennial organizers were careful to preserve all their records related to

the 1993 event. In November 1993, the Council negotiated an archival repository

agreement with DePaul University in Chicago, a Roman Catholic school.19

The resulting

archival collection consists of sixty boxes arranged into six different subject areas:

publications, administration, biographies, Parliament planning, Parliament presentations,

and memorabilia. It is a public treasure for researchers. In addition to the documents

gathered since the establishment of the Council in 1988, individuals and organizations,

notably the Vedanta Society of Chicago, have contributed document collections that shed

additional light on the “pre-history” of the centennial going back to 1982. Particularly

17 Albert Houtin, L'américanisme (Paris: É. Nourry, 1904).

18 Barrows, The World’s Parliament of Religions, 8, 15, 16, 19, 48, 58, 62, 158-159, 1563, 1566,

1568, 1570, 1573; Houghton, Neely’s History of the Parliament of Religions, 19, 27; J.W.

Hanson, The world's congress of religions, 5;

Richard Seager, Dawn of Religious Pluralism: Voices from the World’s Parliament of Religion,

1893 (La Salle, Ill.: Open Court, 1999), 7, 9, 153; Lancaster, Incredible World’s Parliament of

Religions, 24, 210; Ziolkowski, A Museum of Faiths, 27, 51, 54; Richard Hugues Seager,

“Pluralism and the American Mainstream,” in A Museum of Faiths, ed. Ziolkowski, 205-207;

Richard Seager, The World’s Parliament of Religions, The East/West Encounter, Chicago, 1893

(Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1995), 44, 132, 183, 194; Burris, Exhibiting Religion,

49, 53, 131, 150, 153, 170, 171, 172.

19 Joel Beversluis, editor, A SourceBook for the Community of Religions (Chicago: Council for a

Parliament of the World´s Religions, 1995), 116.

283

relevant are the detailed notes of Ms. Judith Lawrence, the first secretary of the Council,

in which she records her conversations with Professor Martin Marty about previous

initiatives to launch a centennial, including those by Cardinal Bernardin, the Archbishop

of Chicago. Especially relevant are Boxes 2 and 58. Box 2 contains the improvised

newsletter from Parliament of the People entitled Your Voice, which opens a window into

the perceptions, feelings, joys and concerns of ‘ordinary’ participants in the Parliament.

Box 58 gathers materials produced immediately following the event by some of the

participating groups that must be credited as the pioneers and actualizers of the

centennial, as well as material from some other minority religions that became strong

protagonists of the 1993 Parliament. There are Parliament appraisals by Vedantist,

Zoroastrian, Theosophist, and Neo-Pagan and some esoteric journals. Ron Kidd,

administrator of the Council in its early stages, also contributed his personal files. Files

for the subsequent Parliaments in Cape Town, South Africa (1999), and Barcelona, Spain

(2004) have also been added to the Council collection.

The best starting point for understanding the centennial event is its official Program with

its record of welcome messages, presidents of the Parliament, co-sponsor organizations,

donors, members of the Council’s board, host committees, Assembly of Spiritual

Leaders, plenaries, major presentations, seminars and lectures, the academic section

(analogous to the scientific section of the first Parliament), and focus sections on the

topics of pluralism, science, violence, business, the media, and the arts. Immediately in

advance of the Centennial Parliament, the Council also published an educational source

book which was widely distributed during the centennial event. Shortly after the

Parliament was over, Anthony Judge, a global events expert from the Union of

International Associations based in Brussels wrote a technical report about the

Parliament, and Vedantist David Nelson wrote a set of reflections, a sort of personal diary

of his participation in the 1993 event. In this privately printed edition of over 100 pages,

Nelson’s observations capture moments and gestures that would have been missed

otherwise.

284

Closely linked to the centennial Parliament program and as a modest attempt to make up

for the lack of official proceedings from the event is an anthology edited by Wayne

Teasdale and George Cairns.20

It brings together essays by twenty-eight contributors who

all but one participated in the Parliament. To date, this edited volume is the only book

published exclusively on the 1993 Parliament. One year after the Teasdale and Cairns

anthology, Carroll Fisher completed a doctoral thesis at the Union Institute and

University entitled “Interfaith Dialogue at the 1893 and 1993 Parliaments of the World’s

Religions”.21

Much remains to be written about the participation of the Catholic Church in the 1993

Parliament. The event offers a window to the multiple levels of engagement and styles of

initiatives that developed throughout the century between the two Parliaments regarding

the attitude of the Catholic Church towards other religions, the place of the Church in

America, and the Church’s relationship to modernity. The Second Vatican Council stands

as the most significant Catholic event between the two Parliaments and was the necessary

prerequisite for Catholic participation in the 1993 gathering. Contrary to assumptions

about a minimal Catholic participation in the 1993 Parliament,22

even a superficial look

at the 1993 program reveals the deep level of lay and clerical Catholic involvement. The

Council’s archives constitute the richest source of information to trace the involvement of

Catholic DePaul University and the Archdiocese of Chicago in the planning process from

the early stages. Fr. Thomas Baima, Cardinal Bernardin’s representrative in the Council,

also produced a helpful thirty-three page White Paper to preserve the memory of

involvement of the Archdiocese of Chicago not only in the Chicago events of 1893 and

1993 but also in subsequent Parliaments in Capetown, and Barcelona. Archbishop

20 Wayne Teasdale and George Cairns, The Community of Religions, Voices and Images of the

Parliament of the World’s Religions (New York: Continuum, 1999).

21 Carroll Fisher, “Interfaith Dialogue at the 1893 and 1993 Parliaments of the World's

Religions,” Thesis (Ph. D.)—The Union Institute and University, Dissertation Abstracts

International; 2001, Vol. 61 Issue 12.

22 Burris, Exhibiting Religions, 170.

285

Francesco Gioia, the Vatican delegate to the 1993 Parliament, prepared a follow-up

report on the 1993 gathering for the Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue in the

Vatican. Key parts of this document were made available for this study. Especially

revealing is Gioia’s reference and inclusion of a “Declaration of Vision” issued by Native

Americans at the Parliament, demanding Pope John Paul II formally revoke the Inter

Cetera Bull of May 4, 1493 that granted the Spanish monarchs dominion over the New

World, an episode not mentioned by any other observer. The 1993 Parliament was also

well covered by the National Catholic Reporter and other Catholic press outlets.

Additional literature

This study of the 1893 and 1993 Parliaments of Religions would not have been possible

except for the scholarship of others. Studies about the 1893 World’s Fair in Chicago, by

Hubert Howe Bancroft (1894) and David Bertuca (1996), were helpful in learning about

the larger context within which the first Parliament of Religions took place. Very useful

as well are sources about Swami Vivekananda, the most celebrated participant in the

1893 Parliament, particularly his biography by Marie Louise Burke (1985). Thomas

Babington Macaulay’s The History of England from the Accession of James II (1887),

Margaret Lisle Shepherd’s My Life in the Convent and Pope Leo’s demand (1892), and

John Higham’s Strangers in the Land: Patterns of American Nativism (1955) shed light

on Protestant perception of Catholics, anti-Catholic rhetoric, and American nativism

respectively. Concerning the lesser known Parliaments of Religions in Toronto (1895)

and Chicago (1933), The Globe and The Catholic Register of Toronto and Charles

Frederick Weller’s World Fellowship, Addresses and Messages by Leading Spokesmen of

All Faiths, Races and Countries have been essential respectively in rescuing these

interfaith initiatives from scholarly oblivion.

Catholic background sources are voluminous and particularly useful to this study.

University of Notre Dame’s almost forgotten The Columbian Jubilee or Four Centuries

of Catholicity in America, being a Historical and Biographical Retrospect from the

Landing of Christopher Columbus to the Chicago Catholic Congress of 1893, edited by

286

Maurice Francis Egan (1893), helped to provide a contemporary Catholic

historiographical framework to the period preceding the 1893 Parliament. Charles

Shanabruch’s Chicago’s Catholics: The evolution of an American Identity (1981) helps

trace the history of Catholicism in Chicago before, during, and after the 1893 Parliament.

Varied, interdisciplinary contributions, such as What Happened at Vatican II by Fr. John

O’Malley, The American Catholic Revolution, How the ‘60s changed the Church forever

by Fr. Mark Massa, Fr. Joseph M. McShane, A people adrift : the crisis of the Roman

Catholic Church in America by Peter Steinfels, American Catholics, American Culture:

tradition and resistance edited by Margaret O'Brien Steinfels, Roman Catholicism in

America by Chester Gillis, The Smoke of Satan by Michael W. Cuneo, The Decline and

Fall of the Catholic Church in America by David Carlin, The Catholic Experience in

America by Joseph Varacalli, among others like Luke Timothy Johnson, Michelle Dillon,

and Beatrice Butreau, in addition to the works of numerous American Catholic historians

constitute an invaluable source of information, reflections and insights about the history

of the Catholic Church in the United States, the Second Vatican Council, the impact of

Vatican II in the American Church, the tensions around tradition and change among

American Catholics, and Catholic interfaith explorations among other subjects.

As for Church documents related to Catholic interfaith relations, Vatican Delegate to the

1993 Parliament, Francesco Gioia’s Interreligious Dialogue: The Official Teaching of the

Catholic Church (2006) has no parallel. Other papal documents are currently accessible

in several languages on the Vatican website. In this new era of internet access, on-line

consultations have been extremely helpful, particularly, the websites of the Catholic

Encyclopedia, and the Franciscan and Passionist historical archives.

287

1893 Parliament Primary Sources

A chorus of faith: as heard in the Parliament of Religions, held in Chicago, Sept. 10-27,

1893, with an introduction by Jenkin Lloyd Jones. Chicago: Unity Publishing Company,

1893.

Barrows, John Henry, editor. The World’s Parliament of Religions, an illustrated and

popular story of the World’s First Parliament of Religions held in Chicago in

connections with the Columbian Exposition of 1893, Volumes I and II. Chicago:

Parliament Publishing Company, 1893.

_______________. “Results of the Parliament of Religions.” In A Museum of Faiths:

Histories and Legacies of the 1893 World’s Parliament of Religions, edited by Eric

Ziolkowski, 131-147. Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1993. Originally published in The Forum

18 (September 1894): 54-67.

Barrows, Mary Eleanor. John Henry Barrows: A Memoir. Chicago, Fleming H. Revell

Company, 1904.

Bonney, Charles Carroll. “The Genesis of the World’s Religious Congresses of 1893.”

The New-Church Review (January 1894): 73-100.

____________. “The Religious Parliament Idea, A True Story of an Orthodox Example.”

The Open Court, A Monthly Magazine 15, 9 (September 1901): 513- 516.

Hanson, J.W., editor. The world's congress of religions: the addresses and papers

delivered before the parliament, and an abstract of the congresses held under the

auspices of the World's Columbian exposition. Chicago: Webb, 1894.

Houghton, Walter, editor. Neely’s History of the Parliament of Religions and Religious

Congresses of the World’s Columbian Exposition: Compiled from Original Manuscripts

and Stenographic Reports. Chicago: F. T. Neely, 1894.

Stevans, C.M., editor. The World's Congress of Religions [microform]: being a complete

and concise history of the most inspiring convocation of civilization, wherein was given

full expression to the irrefutable evidence establishing the independence of mind and the

supremacy of human conscience. Chicago: Laird & Lee, 1894.

288

Archivio Segreto Vaticano

(Secret Vatican Archives)

Archivio Vaticano, Segretaria di Stato (Vatican Archives, Secretary of State)

Anno 1896, Rubrica 262, fasc. 4: Congresso mondiale di religioni in

Chicago (World’s Congress of religions in Chicago)

Anno 1897, Rubrica 280, fasc. 4: Congressi di religioni

(Congresses of religions)

Anno 1900, Rubrica 248, fasc. 1: Congresso di religioni nel 1900 in Parigi

(1900 Congress of religions in Paris)

Anno 1903, Rubrica 43, fasc. 1: Mons. J.J. Keane.

(Mgr. J. J. Keane)

Archivio della Nunziatura (Gia Delegazione) Apostolica degli Stati Uniti D’America,

1893-1921 (Archive of the Apostolic Nuntiatura (Delegation) of the United States of

America 1893-1921)

Posizione 1: Esposizione a Chicago

(Chicago Exhibition)

Posizione 33: Mons. J.J. Keane, arcivescovo di Dubuque

(Mgr. J. J. Keane, Archbishop of Dubuque)

Posizione 34: Incontri annuali degli arcivescovi 1893-1896, 1894-1900

(Annual meetings of the Archbishops 1893-1896, 1894-1900)

289

Archivio Storico De Propaganda Fide

(Propaganda Fide Historical Archive)

Nuova Serie (New Series, in chronological sequence)

Volume 10

Volume 27

Volume 31

Volume 36

Volume 37

Volume 50

Volume 51

Volume 52

Volume 55

Volume 74

Volume 75

Volume 76

Volume 88

Volume 98

Volume 99

Volume 110

Volume 120

Volume 136

Volume 147

Volume 159

Volume 215

290

Volume 217

Volume 229

Volume 255

Volume 284

Kelly Library’s Special Collections,

University of St. Michael’s College, Toronto ON

Shepherd, Margaret Lisle. Pope Leo’s demand: He challenges Americans, and boldly

claims Temporal Power. The Great International Roman Catholic Congress to assemble

in Chicago, during the World’s Fair to execute his plans. Philadelphia: Jordan Brothers,

1892.

Pratt Library’s Special Collections,

Victoria University, Toronto ON

Carroll, H. K. “Our Attitude Toward Roman Catholics,” Methodist Review 11 (March

1895): 231-244.

Lee, John. “Should Methodists “sing low?” The Methodist Review 13 (July 1897): 531-

544.

291

1993 Parliament Primary Sources

Parliament of the World’s Religions Program Catalogue. Chicago: Council for a

Parliament of the World´s Religions, 1993.

DePaul University Archives, Chicago, IL

Council for a Parliament of the World’s Religions Collection (ACPWR)

1993 Parliament

1983-1999

Box 1 Newsletters

Box 2 Your Voice

Box 5 The Council

Box 6A Administrative Cabinet

Boxes 6A, 7A Board of Directors

Box 6B Board of Trustees/Board of Advisers

Box 8A Daniel Gómez-Ibáñez Correspondence (1990-1993)

Box 8B Miscellaneous Correspondence (1988-1993)

Boxes 9, 12A General Parliament Correspondence (1988-1995)

Box 14A Executive Committee (1989-1998)

Box 15A Finance Committee (1988-1998)

Box 16 Nominations Committee (1989-1998)

Box 17C Planning Committee (1988-1993)

Box 18A Program Committee (1988-1993)

Boxes 21A, 21B Research Committee Essays

Boxes 26, 27, 28, 29 Co-Sponsor Cover Sheets (1993)

Box 31 Unnaccepted Co-Sponsors

Box 32 Host Committee Correspondence and Information (1992-1993)

Boxes 33, 34A, 34B Biographies A-F, G-L, M-Z

Box 35A V.I.P. Database and V.I.P. Assembly Members

Box 35B V.I.P. Contact Lists and Miscellaneous Information

292

Box 38 Host Committee Program Description Worksheets (1993)

Box 40 Independent Presenters

Box 45 Religious Organizations Files

Boxes 49, 50 Written Parliament Presentations (1993)

Box 57 Photographs

Box 58 Responses to the Parliament

Box 59 Declaration of Global Ethics, Original, signed

Teach’em Audiotapes:

Volume 4, 360 Bede Griffiths, Swami Dayananda – Visionary Guide and Universal Saint

Ron Kidd File

CPWR Archives Articles

Baima, Thomas. “How to read the Declaration on a Global Ethic.” CPWR Journal 6, 1

(September 1994), in ACPWR, Box 1, Folder: CPWR Journal 1994 September.

Butreau, Beatrice. “Dom Bede Griffith: Vedantic Christian.” Vedanta Free Press, a

journal for growth dialogue and outreach 2, 3 (Winter 1993-1994): 21, in ACPWR, Box

58, Responses to the Parliament, Folder: Special Parliament Issue Vedanta Free Press.

Hirsley, Michael. “News from the Parliament of Religions.” Chicago Tribune, September

3, 1993, in ACPWR, Box 7A, Board of Directors Correspondence (1988-1993), Folder:

Correspondence Concerning Jewish Withdrawal March 24-September 7, 1993.

Knitter, Paul. “Religion and Globality, Can Interreligious Dialogue Be Globally

Responsible?” in ACPWR, Box 50, Written Parliament Presentations, Folder: Knitter.

McCann, Dennis P. “Catholics at the Parliament: An Americanist Breakthrough.” Paper

presented at the American Academy of Religion Annual Meeting, Section: The 1893

Parliament of Religions: New Voices from the Margins, 22-23 November 1991, in

ACPWR, Box 21B, Folder: McCann.

Nelson, David. “Notes and Reflections on the Parliament of the World’s Religions,

1993.” Printed privately in an edition of 50 copies on the first day of Navaratri, 15

October 1993. Revised edition, August 1994, in ACPWR, Box 58, Folder: David Nelson,

“Notes and Reflections on the Parliament of the World’s Religions, 1993.”

293

Roylance, Stephen. “Getting An Education: Buddhism at the Parliament.” Vedanta Free

Press, a journal for growth dialogue and outreach 2, 3 (Winter 1993-1994): 27, in

ACPWR, Box 58, Responses to the Parliament, Folder: Special Parliament Issue Vedanta

Free Press.

Russo, Vinnie. “Witches at the Second Parliament of the World’s Religions.” Tides: A

Journal of Wicca and NeoPagan Spirituality 2, 1 (Samhain/Yule 1993): 19, in ACPWR,

Box 58, Responses to the Parliament, Folder: Thorn Michael. “Three Perspectives of the

Parliament of the World’s Religions.”

Schlenck, John. “Faces of the Parliament.” Vedanta Free Press, a journal for growth

dialogue and outreach 2, 3 (Winter 1993-1994): 27, in ACPWR, Box 58, Responses to

the Parliament, Folder: Special Parliament Issue Vedanta Free Press.

Stockwell, Sarah. “Pagans at the Parliament of the World’s Religions.” Tides: A Journal

of Wicca and NeoPagan Spirituality 2, 1 (Samhain/Yule 1993): 18, in ACPWR, Box 58,

Responses to the Parliament, Folder: Thorn Michael. “Three Perspectives of the

Parliament of the World’s Religions.”

Sulkin, Howard A. “Impressions from the Parliament.” CPWR Journal 6, 1 (November

1993), in ACPWR, Box 1, Folder CPWR Journal, 1993 November.

Thron, Michael. “Report from the Parliament of World Religions: NeoPaganism Comes

of Age?” Tides: A Journal of Wicca and NeoPagan Spirituality 2, 1 (Samhain/Yule

1993): 17, in ACPWR, Box 58, Responses to the Parliament, Folder: Thorn Michael.

“Three Perspectives of the Parliament of the World’s Religions.”

Walker, Ken. “The 1993 Parliament: An Overview.” Vedanta Free Press, a journal for

growth dialogue and outreach 2, 3 (Winter 1993-1994): 10, in ACPWR, Box 58,

Responses to the Parliament, Folder: Special Parliament Issue Vedanta Free Press.

Archives of the Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue

Francesco Gioia, Relazione di Mons. Francesco Gioia in merito alla sua presenza al

Parlamento delle Religioni (Chicago, 28.8-4.9.1993). Courtesy of the Pontifical Council

of Interreligious Dialogue, Vatican City.

294

Francesco Gioia, “The Catholic Church and Other Religions,” Archives of the Pontifical

Council for Interreligious Dialogue (APCID), Protocollo 039117, Nov. 24, 1993.

Courtesy of the Pontifical Council of Interreligious Dialogue, Vatican City.

Office of Ecumenical and Interfaith Affairs

of the Archdiocese of Chicago

Baima, Thomas. “White Paper on the Role of the Archdiocese of Chicago in the

Parliament of the World´s Religions,” confided to the writer by the Office of Ecumenical

and Interfaith Affairs of the Archdiocese of Chicago, n-d.

Graduate Theological Union Archives, Berkeley CA

Bede Griffiths Collection

Box 4:15

Folder: Misc. Papers, Parliament of Religions In Memory of Bede Griffiths.

Box 10

Folder: Bede Griffiths Trust, Certificate of Incorporation and Correspondence, 1992-

1993.

Folder: Bede Griffiths Trust Directors List 1995.

Folder: Posters for events 1993-1995.

Folder: Bede Griffiths Trust Publications.

Box 25

Folder: Correspondence BG to Sr. Pascaline Coff 1975-1983.

Folder: Correspondence BG to Sr. Pascaline 1983-93.

Lokeswarananda, Swami. Swami Vivekananda and the World’s Parliament of Religions

in Chicago, 1893, Centenary Celebrations 11 Sept. 1993 to 27 Sept 1994, Programme

and Appeal. Calcutta: Ramakrishna Mission, 1992. Archives of the Graduate Theological

Union, Berkeley, California (AGTU), Bede Griffiths Collection, Box 4:15, Folder: Misc.

Papers, Parliament of Religions, In Memory of Bede Griffiths.

295

Doctoral Dissertations

Druyvesteyn, Kenten. “The World’s Parliament of Religions.” Ph.D. diss., University of

Chicago, 1976.

Seager, Richard Hughes. “The World’s Parliament of Religions, Chicago, Illinois,

1893: America’s religious coming of age.” Ph. D. diss., Harvard University, 1987.

Fisher, Carroll. “Interfaith Dialogue at the 1893 and 1993 Parliaments of the World's

Religions.” Ph. D. diss., The Union Institute and University, 2001. Dissertation Abstracts

International, 61, 12, 2001.

Newspapers

The Catholic Register, Toronto

The Chicago Tribune

The Globe, Toronto

The National Catholic Reporter

The New York Times

Church Documents

Vatican Council II

Constitution Lumen Gentium

Constitution Dei Verbum

Constitution Gaudium et Spes,

Decree Apostolicam Actuositatem

Decree Ad Gentes

Declaration Nostra Aetate

296

Solemn Magisterium

Pope Leo XIII, Encyclical Letter Praeclara Gratulationis Publicae, (On the

Reunion of Christendom), June 20, 1894.

Pope Leo XIII, Encyclical Letter Quarto Abeunte Saeculo, (On the Columbus

Quadricentennial), July 16, 1892.

Pope Leo XIII, Encyclical Letter Longinque Oceani, (On Catholicity in the

United States) January 6, 1895.

Pope Leo XIII, Apostolic Letter Testem Benevolentiae, January 22, 1899.

Pope Pius X, Encyclical Letter Pascendi Dominici Gregis, September 8,

1907.

Pope Pius XI, Encyclical Letter Mortalium Animos, January 6, 1928.

Pope John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Redemptor Hominis, March 4, 1979

John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Dominum et Vivificantem, May 18, 1986

Pope John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Redemptoris Missio, December 7,

1990.

Magisterium of Pope John Paul II

Pope John Paul II. “Homily at St. Paul’s Outside the Walls, Rome, January 25,

1986.” In Assisi, World Day of Prayer for Peace, 27 October 1986, edited by

Pontifical Commission “Iustitia et Pax,” 13-14. Vatican City: Vatican Polygot

Press, 1987.

297

Pope John Paul II. “General Audience, Rome, October 22, 1986.” In Assisi, World

Day of Prayer for Peace, 27 October 1986, edited by Pontifical Commission

“Iustitia et Pax,” 25-28. Vatican City: Vatican Polygot Press, 1987.

Pope John Paul II. “Opening Address in the Basilica of St. Mary of the Angels,

Assisi, October 27, 1986.” In Assisi, World Day of Prayer for Peace, 27 October

1986, edited by Pontifical Commission “Iustitia et Pax,” 87-89. Vatican City:

Vatican Polygot Press, 1987.

Pope John Paul II. “Introduction to Christian Prayer for Peace in the Cathedral of

St. Rufino, Assisi, October 27, 1896.” In Assisi, World Day of Prayer for Peace,

27 October 1986, edited by Pontifical Commission “Iustitia et Pax,” 90-92.

Vatican City: Vatican Polygot Press, 1987.

Pope John Paul II. “Concluding Address in the Lower Square of St. Francis,

Assisi, October 27, 1986.” In Assisi, World Day of Prayer for Peace, 27 October

1986, edited by Pontifical Commission “Iustitia et Pax,” 93-100. Vatican City:

Vatican Polygot Press, 1987.

Pope John Paul II. “Address to the Leaders of Non-Christian Religions present at

Assisi, Rome, October 29, 1986.” In Assisi, World Day of Prayer for Peace, 27

October 1986, edited by Pontifical Commission “Iustitia et Pax,” 137-138.

Vatican City: Vatican Polygot Press, 1987.

Documents of the Dicasteries of the Roman Curia

Lamentabili Sane, Syllabus Condemning the Errors of the Modernists,

July 3, 1907 by the Supreme Congregation of the Holy Office.

Sacrorum antistitum, Oath against Modernism, September 1, 1910 by the

Supreme Congregation of the Holy Office.

Declaration Dominus Iesus, August 6, 2000 by the Sacred Congregation for the

Doctrine of the Faith.

298

Dialogue and Proclamation, May 19, 1991, jointly by the Sacred Congregation

for the Evangelization of Peoples and the Pontifical Council for Interreligious

Dialogue.

Dialogue and Mission, May 10, 1984 by the Pontifical Council for Interreligious

Dialogue.

Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church (2004) by the Pontifical

Council for Justice and Peace.

Other Documents of the Magisterium

Denzinger, Enrique, editor. El Magisterio de la Iglesia. Barcelona: Herder, 1963.

Gioia, Francesco, editor. Interreligious Dialogue: The Official Teaching of the

Catholic Church. Boston: Pauline, 2006.

Websites

Call to Action, http://cta-usa.org.

Catholic Association of Diocesan Ecumenical and Interfaith Officers,

http://www.cadeio.org/documents/chapter3.pdf

Catholic Encyclopedia, http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07309b.htm

Church Support Ltd., a Catholic charity in Ireland,

http://www.catholicireland.net/church-a-bible/church/history/108-the-unlikely-election-

of-john-xxiii

Claremont School of Theology, http://www.religion-online.org/

Congregation de Notre Dame de Sion,

http://www.notredamedesion.org/fr/index.php

299

Congregation of Our Lady of Sion,

http://www.notredamedesion.org/en/dialogue_sidicView.php?id=640

Council of Religious Leaders of Metropolitan Chicago, http://www.crlmc.org.

Diocese of Saint Augustine, http://www.dosafl.com/NavLanding.asp?ID=188

Documentation Information Catholiques Internationales, the communication agency of

the Priestly Society of St. Pius X, http://www.dici.org/en/documents/assisi-i-october-27-

1986-letter-of-archbishop-lefebvre-to-eight-cardinals-august-27-1986/

Find a Grave, http://www.findagrave.com/cgi-bin/fg.cgi?page=gr&GRid=44547720.

Franciscan Archive, http://www.franciscan-archive.org/bullarium/oath.html.

Franciscan Friars of the Atonement,

http://www.atonementfriars.org/communications_and_online_media/archives_record_cen

ter.html.

Franciscan Media, http://www.americancatholic.org/Features/Assisi/PeaceCapital.asp.

Gandhi Book Centre, Mumbai,

http://www.mkgandhi-sarvodaya.org/letters/unstates/world_fellowship.htm.

Sandro Magister’s Church News,

http://chiesa.espresso.repubblica.it/articolo/19632?eng=y.

Monastic Interfaith Dialogue, http://monasticdialog.com/.

North American Interfaith Network (NAIN), http://www.nain.org/AboutUs.html

300

Papal Encyclicals Online, http://www.papalencyclicals.net/Pius10/p10lamen.htm.

Raymond Panikkar’s Official Website, http://raimon-panikkar.org.

Passionist Biographies, Passionist Historical Archives,

http://cpprovince.org/archives/bios/10/10-14c.php

Peter Abaelard, http://www.abaelard.de/abaelard/050511expositio.htm.

Seth Schoen on Abelard,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Schoen/The_world,_the_flesh,_and_the_devil.

The Hindu, India’s national newspaper

http://www.hindu.com/mag/2011/02/27/stories/2011022750310400.htm.

Time Magazine Online, http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,746034-

1,00.html

Tuepflis Global Village Library, http://www.payer.de/neobuddhismus/neobud0202.htm

Vatican Website, www.vatican.va.

Vivekananda Vedanta Society of Chicago, http://www.vedantasociety-

chicago.org/chi_history.htm.

Wisconsin Lutheran Seminary Library, in

http://www.wlsessays.net/files/JahnVatican.pdf.

World Congress of Faiths, http://www.worldfaiths.org.

301

Books and Articles

100 years: The History of the Church of the Holy Name, the chapel that became a

Cathedral and the Story of Catholicism in Chicago. Chicago: Published by the Cathedral

of the Holy Name, 1949.

Adamson, Iain. Ahmad, The Guided One, A life of the holy founder of the Movement to

unite all religions. Islamabad; Tilford; Surrey: Islam International Publications Ltd, 199?.

Adiswarananda, Swami, editor. Sri Ramakrishna. Woodstock, Vt.: SkyLight Paths Pub.,

2005.

Ahern, Patrick Henry. The Catholic University of America 1887-1896, The Rectorship of

John J. Keane. Washington, DC: The Catholic University of America Press, 1948.

_______________. The Life of John J. Keane, Educator and Archbishop, 1839-1918.

Milwakee : The Bruce Publishing Company, 1955.

Albanese, Catherine and Stephen J. Stein. Foreword to The World’s Parliament of

Religions, The East/West Encounter, Chicago, 1893, by Richard Hugues Seager, ix.

Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1995.

Allen, John L. Jr.. "Indigenous demand revocation of 1493 papal bull", National Catholic

Reporter, Oct 27, 2000. Accessed July 2, 2012. GALE|A67328645.

Allen, S. J. and Emilie Ant. The Crusades: a reader. Peterborough, Ontario: Broadview

Press, 2003.

Alvarez Gómez, Jesús. Historia de la Vida Religiosa, Volumen I, Desde los orígenes

hasta la reforma cluniacense. Madrid: Instituto Teológico de Vida Religiosa, 1987.

Ambrosini, Maria Luisa. The Secret Archives of the Vatican. London: Eyre &

Spottiswoode, 1969.

Arellano, Ignacio and Delio Mendonça, editors. Misión y aventura: San Francisco

Javier, sol en Oriente. Madrid: Iberoamericana; Frankfurt am Main: Vervuert, 2008.

302

Arinze, Card. Francis. “The Contribution of the Various Religions to the Building of

Peace,” L’Osservatore Romano, October 11, 1986. In Assisi, World Day of Prayer for

Peace, 27 October 1986, edited by Pontifical Commission “Iustitia et Pax,” 39-49.

Vatican City: Vatican Polygot Press, 1987.

Armstrong, Karen. Islam. New York: Chronicles Book, 2000.

Arun, Joe, editor. Interculturation of Religion: Critical Perspectives on Robert de

Nobili’s Mission in India. Bangalore: Asian Trading Corp, 2007.

Baima, Thomas. “Toward a Global Ethic: An Initial Declaration: Its Making and Its

Future.” In The Community of Religions, Voices and Images of the Parliament of the

World’s Religions, edited by Wayne Teasdale and George Cairns, 143-149. New York:

Continuum, 1999.

Bancroft, Hubert Howe. The Book of the Fair, An Historical and Descriptive

presentation of the World’s Science, Art, and Industry, as Viewed through the Columbian

Exposition at Chicago in 1893, Volume I. New York: Bounty Books, 1894.

Barnes, Michael Horace, editor. Theology and the social sciences. Maryknoll, N.Y.:

Orbis Books 2001.

Bassham, Rodger C. Mission theology, 1948-1975: years of worldwide creative tension--

ecumenical, evangelical, and Roman Catholic. Pasadena, Ca: William Carey Library,

1979.

Beckerlegge, Gwilym. Swami Vivekananda's legacy of service: a study of the

Ramakrishna Math and Mission. New Delhi: Oxford University Press, 2006.

Beeck, Frans Jozef van. Catholic identity after Vatican II: three types of faith in the one

Church. Chicago: Loyola University Press, 1985.

Bellah, Robert Neely. Uncivil religion: interreligious hostility in America. New York:

Crossroad, 1987.

303

Benson, Robert Hugh. Confessions of a Convert. London; New York : Longmans, 1913.

Bernardin, Joseph. “In agreement with Christianity.” In Yes to a Global Ethic, edited by

Hans Küng, 140-153. London: SMC, 1996.

____________. The Seamless Garment: Writings on the Consistent Ethic of Life.

Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books, 2008.

Berry, Thomas. “The Role of Religions in the 21st Century.” In The Community of

Religions, Voices and Images of the Parliament of the World’s Religions, edited by

Wayne Teasdale and George Cairns, 182-188. New York: Continuum, 1999.

Berstein, Barbara. “A Parliament of the People.” In The Community of Religions, Voices

and Images of the Parliament of the World’s Religions, edited by Wayne Teasdale and

George Cairns, 47-58. New York: Continuum, 1999.

Bertuca, David J., compiler. The World’s Columbian Exposition, A Centennial

Bibliographic Guide. Westport, Connecticut: Greenwood Press, 1996.

Béthune, Pierre François de. “A History of the Monastic Interreligious Dialogue.” In

Catholics in Interreligious Dialogue, Monasticism, Theology and Spirituality, edited by

Anthony O´Mahoney and Peter Bowe, OSB, 3-9. Leominster, Herefordshire: Gracewing,

2006.

Bevans, Stephen B., and Jeffrey Gros. Evangelization and religious freedom: Ad gentes,

Dignitatis humanae. New York; Mahwah, NJ: Paulist Press, 2009.

Beverluis, Joel, editor. A Sourcebook for the Community of Religions. Chicago: Council

for a Parliament of the World’s Religions, 1993.

Billington, Ray Allen. The Protestant crusade, 1800-1860: a study of the origins of

American nativism. Gloucester, Mass: Peter Smith, 1963.

Blied, Benjamin Joseph. Three archbishops of Milwaukee: Michael Heiss (1818-1890)

Frederick Katzer (1844-1903) Sebastian Messmer (1847-1930). Milwaukee: Archdiocese

of Milwaukee, 1955.

304

Boespflug, François and Yves Labbé, editors. Assise, dix ans aprés: 1986-1996. Paris:

Les Editions du Cerf, 1996.

Bonneterre, Didier. The Liturgical Movement: From Dom Guéranger to Annibale

Bugnini. Kansas City, MO: Angelus Press, 2002.

Boulay, Shirley du. Beyond the Darkness: A Biography of Bede Griffiths. New Alresford,

Hampshire: John Hunt Publishing, 2004.

Braybrooke, Marcus. “A Study Guide for Interreligious Cooperation and Understanding.

In A Sourcebook for the Community of Religions, edited by Joel Beverluis, 111-126.

Chicago: Council for a Parliament of the World’s Religions, 1993.

____________. Faith and Interfaith in a Global Age. Grand Rapids, Mi: Conexus, 1998.

____________. Inter-Faith Organizations, 1983-1979. New York: Edwin Mellen Press,

1980.

____________. Pilgrimage of Hope: One Hundred Years of Global Inter-Faith Dialogue.

London: SCM Press Ltd, 1992.

Brown, Stephen F. and Khaled Anatolios. Catholicism & Orthodox Christianity New

York: Chelsea House, 2009.

Bruno-Jofre, Rosa del Carmen. Methodist Education in Peru, Social Gospel, Politics, and

American Ideological and Economic Penetration, 1888-1930. Waterloo, Ontario: Wilfred

Laurier University Press, 1988.

Bunson, Matthew, editor. Our Sunday Visitor’s Catholic Almanac. Huntington, IN: Our

Sunday Visitor’s, 2000.

Buono, Anthony M. The greatest Marian prayers: their history, meaning and usage. New

York: Alba House, 1999.

305

Burke, Marie Louise. Swami Vivekananda in the West, Part One: His Prophetic Mission.

Calcutta: Advaita Arshrama, 1985.

Burris, John P. Exhibiting Religion, Colonialism and Spectacle at International

Expositions 1851-1893. Charlottesville: University Press of Virginia, 2001.

Capra, Fritjof, David Steindl-Rast, and Thomas Matus. Belonging to the Universe. San

Francisco: Harper San Francisco, 1991.

Carden, Ronald M. William Montgomery Brown (1855-1937): The Southern Episcopal

bishop who became a communist. Lewiston, N.Y.: Edwin Mellen Press, 2007.

Carey, Patrick. Catholics in America: a history. Westport, Conn.: Praeger, 2004.

Carlin, David. The Decline and Fall of the Catholic Church in America. Manchester,

New Hampshire: Sophia Institute Press, 2003.

Carney, Tom. "Vatican upholds excommunication." National Catholic Reporter,

December 22, 2006, 9. Accessed July 2, 2012. GALE|A157193911.

Carroll, H. K. “The Present Religious Condition of America.” In The World’s Parliament

of Religions, an illustrated and popular story of the World’s First Parliament of

Religions held in Chicago in connections with the Columbian Exposition of 1893,

Volume II, edited by John Henry Barrows, 1162-1165. Chicago: Parliament Publishing

Company, 1893.

Castellano Cervera, Jesús. “The Relationship with God in Prayer as a Way of Meeting

with Other Believers,” L’Osservatore Romano, October 24, 1986. In Assisi, World Day

of Prayer for Peace, 27 October 1986, edited by Pontifical Commission “Iustitia et Pax,”

77-81. Vatican City: Vatican Polygot Press, 1987.

Castro, Emilio. “In Assisi to Stir the Conscience of Humanity,” L’Osservatore Romano,

October 25, 1986. In Assisi, World Day of Prayer for Peace, 27 October 1986, edited by

Pontifical Commission “Iustitia et Pax,” 82. Vatican City: Vatican Polygot Press, 1987.

Cassidy, Edward Idris. Ecumenism and interreligious dialogue: Unitatis redintegratio,

Nostra aetate. New York: Paulist Press, 2005.

306

Cernera, Anthony J. Examining Nostra Aetate after 40 years: Catholic-Jewish relations

in our time. Fairfield, Conn.: Sacred Heart University Press, 2007.

Charbonnel, Victor, “An explanation,” The Open Court Journal 1 (1899): 36-44.

Chattopadhya, Rajagopal. Swami Vivekananda in India: A Corrective Biography. Delhi:

Motilar Banarsidass Publishers, 1999.

Chittister, Joan. The way we were: a story of conversion and renewal. Maryknoll, N.Y.:

Orbis Books, 2005.

Cleary, James, “Catholic Participation in the World’s Parliament of Religions,” The

Catholic Historical Review, 55, 4 (1970): 585-609.

Clooney, Francis X. "Learning to listen: Benedict XVI & interreligious dialogue."

Commonweal 134, 1 (2007): 11.

Confoy, Maryanne. Religious life and priesthood: Perfectae caritatis, Optatam totius,

Presbyterorum ordinis. Mahwah, NJ; New York: Paulist Press, 2008.

Congregation of Our Lady of Sion. A Nineteenth Century Miracle: The Brothers

Ratisbone and the Congregation of Our Lady of Sion, translated from the French by L.

M. Leggatt. London: Burns Oates and Washbourne, 1922.

Cousins, Ewart. “Religions on the Eve of the 21st Century.” In The Community of

Religions, Voices and Images of the Parliament of the World’s Religions, edited by

Wayne Teasdale and George Cairns, 159-162. New York: Continuum, 1999.

Cross, Robert D. The emergence of liberal Catholicism in America. Cambridge, Mass.:

Harvard University Press, 1958.

Cuneo, Michael W. The Smoke of Satan. New York: Oxford University Press, 1997.

307

Curran, Robert Emmet. Michael Augustine Corrigan and the Shaping of Conservative

Catholicism in America, 1878-1902. New York: Arno Press, 1978.

D'Costa, Gavin, editor. The Catholic Church and the world religions: a theological and

phenomenological account. London: T&T Clark, 2011.

De Montmorency, James Edward Geoffrey. Thomas A Kempis, his age and book. Port

Washington, NY: Kennikat Press, 1970.

Delhaye, Philippe. “Unity and Multiplicity of Prayers for Peace in Assisi,” L’Osservatore

Romano, October 4, 1986 In Assisi, World Day of Prayer for Peace, 27 October 1986,

edited by Pontifical Commission “Iustitia et Pax,” 50-56. Vatican City: Vatican Polygot

Press, 1987.

DePalma, Margaret C. Dialogue on the Frontier, Catholic and Protestant Relation, 1793-

1893. Kent, Ohio: The Kent State University Press, 2004.

Dirks, Jerald F.The Abrahamic faiths : Judaism, Christianity, and Islam: similarities &

contrasts. Beltsville, Md.: Amana Publications, 2004.

Dolan, Jay P. “Catholic Attitudes towards Protestants.” In Uncivil religion: interreligious

hostility in America, edited by Robert Neely Bellah, 72-85. New York: Crossroad, 1987.

_______________. The American Catholic Experience. New York: Doubleday, 1985.

Dörmann, Johannes. Pope John Paul II’s Theological Journey to the Prayer Meeting of

Religions in Assisi, Part I. Kansas City, Missouri: Angelus Press, 1994.

Downey, Dennis B. “Tradition and Acceptance: American Catholics and the Columbian

Exposition.” Mid America, An Historical Review, 63, 2 (1981): 79-91.

Dries, Angelyn. “American Catholics and World Religions, Theory and Practice: 1893-

1959.” American Catholic Studies 113, 1-2 (2002): 31-50.

308

Duerbeck, Julian Von. “Impressions of the ‘93 Parliament Procession.” Sisters Today 67

(May 1995): 178-180.

Duncan, Kenneth. “Irish Famine Immigration and the Social Structure of Canada West.”

Canadian Review of Sociology and Anthopology 2 (1965): 19-40.

Efthimiou, Miltiades. “A Brief History of Greek Orthodoxy in America.” Greek

Orthodox Theological Review 45, ¼ (Spring 2000): 193-216. ProQuest (ID 220282456).

Ellis, John Tracy. American Catholicism. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1956.

_______________. The Life of James Cardinal Gibbons, Archbishop of Baltimore,

Volume II. Milwaukee: The Bruce Publishing Company, 1952.

Ellis, William. Patrick Henry Callahan 1866-1940: Progressive Catholic Layman in the

American South. Lewiston, N.Y.: E. Mellen Press, 1989.

Epstein, Debbie and Richard Johnson. Schooling Sexualities. Buckingham, UK: Open

University Press, 1998.

Esposito, John L., Darrell J. Fasching and Todd Lewis. Religion & globalization: world

religions in historical perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008.

Esposito, Rosario F. Pio IX: la Chiesa in conflitto col mondo: la S. Sede, la massoneria e

il radicalismo settario. Roma: Edizioni paoline, 1979.

Fallo, Elena. Antisemitismo in America: storia dei pregiudizi e dei movimenti anti-ebraici

negli Stati Uniti da Henry Ford a Louis Farrakhan. Boves: Araba Fenice, 2008.

Farrelly, Maura Jane. Papist patriots: the making of an American Catholic identity. New

York: Oxford University Press, 2012.

Fernando, Leonard and G. Gispert-Sauch. Christianity in India: two thousand years of

faith. New Delhi: Viking, 2004.

309

Fieldsend, John et al. Roots and branches: explorations into the Jewish context of the

Christian faith. Bedford: PWM Trust and The Centre for Biblical and Hebraic Studies,

1998.

Fièvez, Marguerite and Jacques Meert. Cardijn. Bruxelles: E.V.O. Èditions "Vie

ouvrière", 1969.

Flannery, Austin, editor. Vatican Council II: The Conciliar and Post-Conciliar

Documents. Dublin: Dominican Publications, 1988.

Fogarty, Gerald. The Vatican and the American Hierarchy from 1870 to 1965.

Wilmington, Del.: Michael Glazier, 1985.

____________. The Vatican and the Americanist Crisis: Denis J. O´Connell, American

Agent in Rome, 1885-1903. Rome: Università Gregoriana Editrice, 1974.

Foltz, Richard C. Religions of the Silk Road, Overland Trade and Cultural Exchange

from Antiquity to the Fifteenth Century. New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1999.

Fraile, Guillermo. Historia de la Filosofía, Volumen III, Del Humanismo a la Ilustración

(Siglos XV-XVIII). Madrid: Biblioteca de Autores Cristianos, 1978.

Franco, Massimo. Parallel Empires, The Vatican and the United States-Two Centuries of

Alliance and Conflict. New York: Doubleday, 2008.

Frazier, William. "A monumental breakthrough in the Missiology of Vatican II and its

reception by ongoing leadership in the church." International Bulletin of Missionary

Research 34, 3 (2010): 139+ GALE|A231505214.

Friedman, Richard. Who wrote the Bible? New York: HarperSanFrancisco, 1987.

Fuller, Robert C. Spiritual but Not Religious. New York: Oxford University Press, 2001.

310

Gadille, Jacques, “The Failure to Reconcile Catholics and the Republic in France.” In

History of the Church, IX, edited by Jedin and Dolan, 96-106. New York: Crossroad,

1981.

Gaillardetz, Richard R. The church in the making: Lumen Gentium, Christus Dominus,

Orientalium Ecclesiarum. New York : Paulist Press, 2006.

Gallagher, Jim. Woman’s Work: Story of the Focolare Movement and Its Founder. Hyde

Park, NY: New City Press, 1998.

Gateley, Edwina. In God’s Womb, A Spiritual Memoir. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books,

2009.

Gillis, Chester. Roman Catholicism in America. New York: Columbia University Press,

1999.

Goldberg, Philip. American Veda: from Emerson and the Beatles to yoga and meditation:

how Indian spirituality changed the West. New York: Harmony Books, 2010.

Gonnet, Dominique. La liberté religieuse à Vatican II: la contribution de John Courtney

Murray, S.J. Paris: Editions du Cerf, 1994.

González Moralejo, Rafael. El Vaticano II en taquigrafía: la historia de la "Gaudium et

spes." Madrid: Biblioteca de Autores Cristianos, 2000.

Greenberg, Irving. "John Paul II: assessing his legacy." Commonweal 132, 8 (2005): 13+.

GALE|A132230435.

Gregerson, Linda and Susan Juster, editors. Empires of God: religious encounters in the

early modern Atlantic. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2011.

Gregorios, Paulos Mar. “The Vision Beckons.” Inaugural speech at the kick-off

centennial event, November 4, 1989. In A Sourcebook for the Community of Religions,

edited by Joel Beverluis, 15. Chicago: Council for a Parliament of the World’s Religions,

1993.

311

Hahn, Johannes, Stephen Emmel & Ulrich Gotter, editors. From temple to church:

destruction and renewal of local cultic topography in late antiquity. Leiden; Boston:

Brill, 2008.

Hallward, Clare, editor. David Steindl-Rast, Essential Writings. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis,

2010.

Hanley, Boniface. Paulist Father, Isaac Kecker: An American Saint. Mahwah, NJ:

Paulist Press, 2008.

Harris, John. One Blood: 200 years of aboriginal encounter with Christianity, a story of

hope. Sutherland, N.S.W.: Albatross Books, 1990.

Hayes, Carlton J. H. “Cooperation with non-Catholics.” America 65, 8 (1941): 207.

Hebblethwaite, Peter. In the Vatican, How the Church is run –its personalities, traditions

and conflicts. Bethesda, Md.: Adler&Adler, 1986.

_______________. John XXIII, Pope of the Council. London: Geoffrey Chapman, 1984.

_______________. John XXIII, Pope of the Century. New York: Continuum, 2000.

_______________. Paul VI: the first modern Pope. London: HarperCollins, 1993.

_______________. Pope John Paul II and the Church. Kansas City: Sheed & Ward,

1995.

_______________. The New Inquisition? The Case of Edward Schillebeeckx & Hans

Küng. San Francisco: Harper & Row Publichers, 1980.

Heft, James L., editor. Catholicism and interreligious dialogue. New York: Oxford

University Press, 2012.

312

Hehir, Bryan. Catholic Charities USA: 100 Years at the Intersection of Charity and

Justice. Collegeville, Minn.: Liturgical Press, 2006.

Heisig, James W. “The Dialogue among religions, looking back, looking ahead.” Nanzan

Bulletin 17 (1993): 42.

Hennesey, James. American Catholics: a history of the Roman Catholic community in the

United States. New York: Oxford University Press, 1981.

Hick, John and Paul F. Knitter, editor. The Myth of Christian Uniqueness, Toward a

Pluralistic Theology of Religions. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books, 1988.

Higham, John. Strangers in the Land: Patterns of American Nativism, 1860-1925. New

Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 1955.

Holli, Melvin and Peter Jones. Ethnic Chicago: A Multicultural Portrait. Grand Rapids,

Michigan: Eerdmans, 1995.

Houtin, Albert. L'américanisme. Paris: É. Nourry, 1904.

Jedin, Hubert and John Dolan, editors. History of the Church, Volume IX: The Church in

the Industrial Age. New York: Crossroad, 1981.

Jodock, Darrell. Catholicism contending with Modernity, Roman Catholic Modernism

and Anti-Modernism in Historical Context. Cambridge, UK; New York: Cambridge

University Press, 2000.

Johnson, Luke Timothy. “Abortion, Sexuality, and Catholicism’s Public Presence.” In

American Catholics, American Culture: tradition and resistance, edited by Margaret

O'Brien Steinfels, 27-38. Lanham Md.: Rowman & Littlefield, 2004.

Johnson, Rossiter, editor. A History of the World’s Columbian Exposition held in

Chicago in 1893, IV. New York: D. Appleton, 1897-1898.

313

Judge, Anthony. “Learnings for the Future of Inter-Faith Dialogue. Part I: Questions

arising from the Parliament of the World’s Religions, Chicago, 1993,” Transnational

Associations, 6 (1993): 345-354.

Katju, Manjari. Vishva Hindu Parishad and Indian politics. Hyderabad: Orient Longman,

2003.

Kenney, Jim. “The Parliament Experience: 1993 and Beyond.” In The Community of

Religions, Voices and Images of the Parliament of the World’s Religions, edited by

Wayne Teasdale and George Cairns, 135-142. New York: Continuum, 1999.

Kidd, Ron. “Early Dreams and Plans for the Centennial.” In A SourceBook for the

Community of Religions, edited by Joel Beversluis, 10-14. Chicago: Council for a

Parliament of the World’s Religions, 1993.

Klein, Felix. Une heresie fantome: L’Americanism. Paris: Plom, 1949.

Klooster, Wim. Revolutions in the Atlantic world: a comparative history. New York:

New York University Press, 2009.

Kloschorke, Klaus, Frieder Ludwig, Marian Delgado, editors. A History of Christianity in

Asia, Africa, and Latin America. Grand Rapids, Mich: Eerdmans, 2007.

Knitter, Paul. “Pluralism and Oppression: Dialogue between the Many Religions and the

Many Poor.” In The Community of Religions, Voices and Images of the Parliament of the

World’s Religions, edited by Wayne Teasdale and George Cairns, 198-208. New York:

Continuum, 1999.

Köhler, Oscar. “The World Plan of Leo XIII: Goals and Methods.” In History of the

Church, Volume IX: The Church in the Industrial Age, edited by Hubert Jedin and John

Dolan, 6-106. New York: Crossroad, 1981.

Küng, Hans. Christianity, Essence, History, and Future. New York: Continuum, 2008.

_______________. Global Responsibility: In Search of a New World Ethic. New York:

Crossroad Pub. Co., 1991.

314

_______________. Infallible? An Inquiry. Garden City, NY: Doubleday.1983.

_______________. Projekt Weltethos. München: Piper, 2011.

_______________. The Catholic Church, A Short History. New York: Modern Libraries

Chronicle, 2001.

Küng, Hans and Karl-Joseph Kuschel, editors. A Global Ethic, The Declaration of the

Parliament of the World’s Religions. New York: Continuum, 1993.

Kurien, Prema. “Religion, ethnicity and politics: Hindu and Muslim Indian immigrants in

the United States.” Ethnic and Racial Studies, 24.2 (2001): 263-293.

Laboa, Juan María, editor. The Historical Atlas of Eastern and Western Christian

Monasticism. Collegeville, Minn.: The Liturgical Press, 2001.

Lamberts, Emiel. “Catholic Congresses as Amplifiers of International Catholic Opinion.”

In The Papacy and the New World Order, edited by Vincent Viaene, 213-223. Leuven:

Leuven University Press, 2005.

Lancaster, Clay. Incredible World’s Parliament of Religions at the Chicago Columbian

Exposition of 1893: A Comparative and Critical Study. Fontwell: Diane Pub Co., 1987.

Latourette, Kenneth Scott. A History of the Expansion of Christianity, seven volumes.

New York: Harper and Brothers Publishers, 1937-45.

Leckey, Dolores R. The laity and Christian education: apostolicam actuositatem,

gravissimum educationis. New York: Paulist Press, 2006.

Lee, John. Religious Liberty in Latin America. Cincinnati: Jennings, 1907.

Leo XIII. The Great Encyclical Letters of Pope Leo XIII, translations from approved

sources, with Preface by Rev. John J. Wynne, s.j. New York: Benziger Brothers, 1903.

315

Levine, David. At the dawn of modernity: biology, culture, and material life in Europe

after the year 1000. Berkeley: University of California Press, 2001.

Levinsohn, Florence H. Looking for Farrakhan. Chicago: Ivan R. Dee, 1997.

López Hernández, Eleazar, Teología India, Antología. Cochabamba: Universidad

Católica Boliviana, Editorial Verbo Divino, 2000.

López -Baralt, Luce. Huellas del Islam en la Literatura Española, De Juan Ruiz a Juan

Goytisolo. Madrid: Hiperion, 1985.

Lossky, Nicholas et al. Dictionary of the Ecumenical Movement. Geneva: WCC

Publications, 2002.

Macaulay, Thomas Babington. The History of England from the Accession of James II,

including The Life and Letters of Lord Macaulay, by his nephew, George Otto Trevelyan.

New York: W. M. L. Allison Publisher, 1887.

Madden, Thomas F. Crusades: the illustrated history. Ann Harbor: University of

Michigan Press, 2004.

Madey, John. Orientalium ecclesiarum, more than twenty years after: a new commentary

on Vatican II's decree on the oriental Catholic Churches. Kottayam, Kerala, India:

Pontifical Oriental Institute of Religious Studies, 1987.

Madrid, Patrick, More Catholic than the Pope. Huntington, Ind.: Our Sunday Visitor,

2004.

Maffeis, Angelo. Ecumenical dialogue. Collegeville, Minn.: Liturgical Press, 2005.

Maier, Pauline. “The Pope at Harvard: The Dudleian Lectures, Anti-Catholicism, and the

Politics of Protestantism, ” Proceedings of the Massachusetts Historical Society 97

(1985): 16-41. Accessed July 3, 2012.

http://www.jstor.org.myaccess.library.utoronto.ca/stable/25080941.

Maignen, Charles. Is Fr. Hecker a saint? London: Burns and Oates, 1898.

316

Marini, Piero. Serving the people of God: remembering Sacrosanctum Concilium.

Ottawa: Novalis, 2006.

Martin, Joel W. The land looks after us: a history of Native American religion. Oxford;

New York: Oxford University Press, 2001.

Marty, Martin E. “A Cosmopolitan Habit in Theology.” In A Museum of Faiths: Histories

and Legacies of the 1893 World’s Parliament of Religions, edited by Eric Ziolkowski,

165-170. Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1993. Originally constituted chapter 2 of Martin E.

Marty, Modern American Religion, vol. 1: The Irony of It All: 1893-1919 (Chicago:

University of Chicago Press, 1986).

Massa, Mark S. The American Catholic Revolution, How the ‘60s changed the Church

forever. New York: Oxford University Press, 2010.

Matus, Thomas. Ashram Diary, In India with Bede Griffiths. Washington, DC: O Books,

2009.

_______________. Yoga and the Jesus Prayer. Ramsey, NJ: Paulist Press, 1984.

McAvoy, C.S.C., Thomas T. A History of the Catholic Church in the United States. Notre

Dame, Ind.: University of Notre Dame Press, 1969.

_______________. The Americanist Heresy in Roman Catholicism, 1895-1900. Notre

Dame, Ind.: University of Notre Dame Press, 1963.

McBrien, Richard P. The Church: the evolution of Catholicism. New York, NY:

HarperOne, 2008.

McGlynn Gaffney, Jr, Edward. "Benedict's blunder: ground rules for Muslim-Christian

conversation." The Christian Century 123, 22 (2006): 24+. GALE|A154239417.

McGovern, James. Souvenir of the Silver Jubilee in the Episcopacy of His Grace The

Most Rev. Patrick Augustine Feehan, Archbishop of Chicago, November 1st, 1891.

Chicago: Publications of the Archdiocese of Chicago, 1892.

317

McGowan, Mark. Death or Canada, The Irish Famine Migration to Toronto, 1847.

Toronto: Novalis, 2009.

McGowan, Mark and Brian Clark, editors. Catholics at the “Gathering Place”:

Historical Essays on the Archdiocese of Toronto 1841-1991. Toronto: Canadian Catholic

Historical Association, 1993.

Mejía, Jorge. “A Theological Reflection of the World Day of Prayer for Peace,”

L’Osservatore Romano, September 17, 1986. In Assisi, World Day of Prayer for Peace,

27 October 1986, edited by Pontifical Commission “Iustitia et Pax,” 31-38. Vatican City:

Vatican Polygot Press, 1987.

Melloni, Alberto, editor. ‘Movements’ in the church. London: SCM Press, 2003.

Merriman, Scott. Religion and the State: an international analysis of roles and

relationships. Santa Barbara, Calif.: ABC-CLIO, 2009.

Mettepenningen, Jürgen. Nouvelle théologie - new theology: inheritor of Modernism,

precursor of Vatican II. London: T & T Clark, 2010.

Miller, Kerby A. Emigrants and exiles: Ireland and the Irish exodus to North America.

New York: Oxford University Press, 1985.

Minus, Paul M. The Catholic Rediscovery of Protestantism, A History of Roman Catholic

Ecumenical Pioneering. New York: Paulist Press, 1976.

Moir, John S. “Toronto’s Protestants and Their Perceptions of Their Roman Catholic

Neighbours.” In Catholics at the “Gathering Place”: Historical Essays on the

Archdiocese of Toronto 1841-1991, edited by Mark McGowan and Brian Clark, 313-340.

Toronto: Canadian Catholic Historical Association, 1993.

Moynihan, James H. The Life of Archbishop John Ireland. New York: Harper and

Brothers Publishers, 1953.

318

Müller, Friedrich Max, “The Real Significance of the Parliament of Religions.” In A

Museum of Faiths: Histories and Legacies of the 1893 World’s Parliament of Religions,

edited by Eric Ziolkowski, 149-164. Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1993. Originally published

in The Arena 11, 61 (December 1894): 1-14.

Mungello, D., editor. The Chinese Rites Controversy: Its History and Meaning. Nettetal,

North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany: Steyler Verlag, 1994.

Nash, Ronald H. Christianity and the Hellenistic world. Grand Rapids, Mich.:

Zondervan; Dallas, Tex.: Probe Ministries International, 1984.

Neill, Stephen. A History of Christian Missions. London: Penguin, 1964.

Nelson, Robert S. Hagia Sophia, 1850-1950: holy wisdom modern monument. Chicago:

University of Chicago Press, 2004.

Neuhaus, Richard John. "The Regensburg Moment." First Things: A Monthly Journal of

Religion and Public Life 167 (2006): 63+. GALE|A153413217.

Nichols, Aidan. Rome and the Eastern Churches: a study in schism. San Francisco,

Calif.: Ignatius Press, 2010.

Nuesse, C. Joseph. The Catholic University of America, A Centennial History

(Washington, D.C.: Catholic University of America Press, 1990.

O'Brien Steinfels, Margaret, editor. American Catholics, American Culture: tradition and

resistance. Lanham Md.: Rowman & Littlefield, 2004.

Ochs, Stephen J. "The Ordeal of the Black Priest," US Catholic Historian 5, 1 (1986): 45-

66. Accessed July 3, 2012.

http://www.jstor.org.myaccess.library.utoronto.ca/stable/25153743.

O’Connell, Marvin R. John Ireland and the American Catholic Church. St. Paul:

Minnesota Historical Society Press, 1988.

319

Official Report of the Proceedings of the Catholic Congress, held at Baltimore, MD,

November 11th

and 12th

, 1889. Detroit: William H. Hugues, Publisher, 1889.

Oldmeadow, Harry. A Christian pilgrim in India: the spiritual journey of Swami

Abhishiktananda (Henri Le Saux). Bloomington, Ind.: World Wisdom, 2008.

O’Mahoney, Anthony and Peter Bowe, OSB, editors. Catholics in Interreligious

Dialogue, Monasticism, Theology and Spirituality. Leominster, Herefordshire:

Gracewing, 2006.

O’Malley, John W. "The Beatification of Pope Pius IX: Do we judge Pius's conduct

against the standards of his day or ours?" America, 26 Aug. (2000): 6. Accessed July 3,

2012. http://www.americamagazine.org/content/article.cfm?article_id=2118.

_______________. What Happened at Vatican II. Cambridge, Mass: The Belknap Press

of Harvard University Press, 2008.

Ortega y Gasset, José. Meditaciones sobre la Literatura y el Arte. Madrid: Castalia, 1987.

Overy, Richard. Hammond Atlas of the 20th

Century. London: Times Books, 1999.

Papaioannou, George. “The Diamond Jubilee of the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of

America.” Greek Orthodox Theological Review, 45. ¼ (Spring 2000): 217-306. ProQuest

(ID 220263695).

Paquet, Louis-Ad. “Un chapitre d’histoire contemporaine-Le cardinal Satolli,” Paper

presented at the meeting of the Royal Society of Canada, Ottawa, May 1916.

Parra-Pirela, Carlos Hugo. Who is my neighbour? A Window into the Interfaith

Experience and Potential of Member Churches of the Canadian Council of Churches.

Toronto: The Canadian Council of Churches, 2010.

Pªrez PellÄn, Javier. Wojtyla, el ˙ltimo cruzado: un papado medieval en el fin del

milenio. Madrid: Ediciones Temas de Hoy, 1994.

320

Peters, Edward N. Excommunication and the Catholic Church: straight answers to tough

questions. West Chester, Pa.: Ascension Press, 2006.

Pollard, John F. “Leo XIII and the United States of America, 1898-1903.” In The Papacy

and the New World Order, edited by Vincent Viaene, 465-477. Leuven: Leuven

University Press, 2005.

Pongratz-Lippitt, Christa. "Writer witnessed conversation between cardinal and censured

theologian Jacques Dupuis." National Catholic Reporter, March 21, 2008: 17+. Accessed

July 4, 2012. GALE|A177813156.

Pontifical Commission “Iustitia et Pax.” Assisi, World Day of Prayer for Peace, 27

October 1986. Vatican City: Vatican Polygot Press, 1987.

Pope, Stephen J. and Charles Hefling, editors. Sic et non: encountering Dominus Iesus.

Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books, 2002.

Power, Michael. "An Introduction to the Life and Work of Dean Harris 1847-1923.” In

Catholics at the “Gathering Place”: Historical Essays on the Archdiocese of Toronto

1841-1991, edited by Mark McGowan and Brian Clark, 119’140. Toronto: Canadian

Catholic Historical Association, 1993.

Preziosi, Ernesto, editor. Storia dell'Azione cattolica: la presenza nella Chiesa e nella

societ· italiana. Soveria Mannelli: Rubbettino, 2008.

Prien, Hans-Jurgen. La Historia del Cristianismo en América Latina. Salamanca:

Ediciones Sigueme, 1985.

Rasimus, Tuomas, Troels Engberg-Pedersen and Ismo Dunderberg, editors, Stoicism in

Early Christianity. Grand Rapids, MI: BakerAcademic, 2010.

Ratzinger, Cardinal Joseph and Tarcisio Bertone. “On the writings of Father De Mello.”

The Pope Speaks 44, 22 (Mar/Apr 1999). ProQuest (ID 220789516).

Reeve, W. Paul and Ardis E. Parshall, editors. Mormonism: a historical encyclopedia.

Santa Barbara, Calif.: ABC-CLIO, 2010.

321

Réville, Jean. “The International Congress of the History of Religions.” The Open Court

Journal 5 (1900): 271-275.

Rico, Herminio. John Paul II and the legacy of Dignitatis humanae. Washington, D.C.:

Georgetown University Press, 2002.

Ries, Julien. Les chrétiens parmi les religions. Des Actes des Apotres a Vatican II. Paris:

Desclée, 1987.

Rivetna, Rohinton. “Jashans around the world,” Fezana Journal, 4.4 (Winter 1993): 36.

Roccasalvo, Joan L.The Eastern Catholic churches: an introduction to their worship and

spirituality. Collegeville, Minn.: Liturgical Press, 1992.

Rockaway, Robert A."The Jews cannot defeat me": the anti-Jewish campaign of Louis

Farrakhan and the Nation of Islam. Tel Aviv: Tel Aviv University, Lester and Sally

Entin Faculty of Humanities, 1995.

Rodenbaugh, Dana. “Religious leaders endorse ´new global ethic,” National Catholic

Reporter, 29, 3, Sept 17, 1993. Accessed July 4, 2012. GALE|A13286003.

_______________. “Unique Parliament of Religions celebrates diversity,” National

Catholic Reporter, 29, 4, Sept 10, 1993. Accessed July 4, 2012. ProQuest (ID

215341970).

Rodhe, Sten. Jules Monchanin: pioneer in Christian-Hindu dialogue. Delhi: Indian

Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge, 1993.

Rossano, Pietro. “Prayer as a Human Need and the possibility of sharing it,”

L’Osservatore Romano, October 18, 1986. In Assisi, World Day of Prayer for Peace, 27

October 1986, edited by Pontifical Commission “Iustitia et Pax,” 71-74.

Vatican City: Vatican Polygot Press, 1987.

Rouse, Ruth, editor. A History of the Ecumenical Movement. Geneva: World Council of

Churches, 1986.

322

Sardar, Ziauddin, “Islam must embrace different sects,” New Statesman 135, 4806

(August 21, 2006): 21. Accessed July 4, 2012. Factiva Document

NSTS000020060914e28l0000p.

Schaeffer, Pamela, "Condemned priest is restored to church." National Catholic Reporter

30, Jan. 1998: 3+. Accessed July 4, 2012. GALE|A20229337.

_______________. "The most severe penalty has a long history." National Catholic

Reporter 5, Apr. 1996: 5. Accessed July 4, 2012. GALE|A18202196.

Schaff, Philip, “The Reunion of Christendom.” In Dawn of Religious Pluralism: Voices

from the World’s Parliament of Religion, 1893, edited by Richard Seager, 93-130. La

Salle, Ill.: Open Court, 1999.

Scola, Angelo. “Being together to pray for peace,” L’Osservatore Romano, October 11,

1986. In Assisi, World Day of Prayer for Peace, 27 October 1986, edited by the

Pontifical Commission “Iustitia et Pax,” 57-61. Vatican City: Vatican Polygot Press,

1987.

Scollard, Robert. “Rev. William Richard Harris, 1846-1923.” Canadian Catholic

Historical Association Study Sessions 41 (1974): 65-80. Accessed June 25, 2012.

http://www.umanitoba.ca/colleges/st_pauls/ccha/Back%20Issues/CCHA1974/Scollard.pd

f.

Seager, Richard. Dawn of Religious Pluralism: Voices from the World’s Parliament of

Religion, 1893. La Salle, Ill.: Open Court, 1999.

_______________. “Pluralism and the American Mainstream.” In A Museum of Faiths:

Histories and Legacies of the 1893 World’s Parliament of Religions, edited by Eric

Ziolkowski, 194-204. Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1993. Originally published in Harvard

Theological Review 82 (1989): 301-324.

_______________. “The Two Parliaments, the 1893 Original and the Centennial of 1993:

A Historian´s View.” In The Community of Religions, Voices and Images of the

Parliament of the World’s Religions, edited by Wayne Teasdale and George Cairns, 22-

33. New York: Continuum, 1999.

323

_______________. The World’s Parliament of Religions, The East/West Encounter,

Chicago, 1893. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1995.

Sévère, Sulpice, Vie de Saint Martin. Translated by Jacques Fontaine. Paris: Éditions du

Cerf, 1967-69.

Shanabruch, Charles. Chicago’s Catholics: The evolution of an American Identity. Notre

Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press, 1981.

Sheard, Robert. Interreligious Dialogue in the Catholic Church since Vatican II, An

Historical and Theological Study. Lewiston, N.Y.: Edwin Mellen Press, 1987.

Shepherd, Margaret Lisle. My Life in the Convent,: or the marvelous personal

experiences of Margaret L. Shepherd (Sister Magdalene Adelaide), consecrated penitent

of the Arno´s Court Convent, Bristol, England. Canada & New South Wells, Australia:

Margaret L. Shepherd, publisher, 1892.

Sherwin, Byron L. and Harold Kasimov, editors. John Paul II and Interreligious

Dialogue. New York: Orbis Books, 1999.

Silverman, Helaine, editor. Contested cultural heritage: religion, nationalism, erasure,

and exclusion in a global world. New York; London: Springer, 2011.

Sinclair, Upton. The Jungle. New York: Penguin Books, 1985.

Slattery, J. R., editor. Francis Archbishop Satolli. Loyalty to Church and State.

Baltimore: John Murphy and Company, 1895.

Smith, Judith A., “The American Dream Actualized: The Glistening ‘White City’ and the

Lurking Shadows of the World’s Columbian Exposition.” In The World’s Columbian

Exposition, A Centennial Bibliographic Guide, compiled by David J. Bertuca, xix-xxix.

Westport, Connecticut: Greenwood Press, 1996.

Soble, Alan G. “Correcting Some Misconceptions about Saint Augustine’s Sex Life,”

Journal of the History of Sexuality 11, 4 (2002): 545-569.

DOI: 10.1353/sex.2003.0045.

324

Souvenir Volume of the Centennial Celebration and Catholic Congress, 1789-1889.

Detroit: William H. Hughes Publisher, 1889.

Steinfels, Peter. A people adrift: the crisis of the Roman Catholic Church in America.

New York: Simon & Schuster, 2003.

Steinfels, Peter and Robert Royal. Introduction to American Catholics, American

Culture: tradition and resistance, edited by Margaret O'Brien Steinfels, xi-xviii. Lanham

Md.: Rowman & Littlefield, 2004.

Stransky, Tom. “Roman Catholic Church and Pre-Vatican Ecumenism.” In Dictionary of

the Ecumenical Movement, edited by Nicholas Lossky, 996-998. Geneva: WCC

Publications, 2002.

Swami Vivekananda Centenary Committee. Parliament of Religions. Calcutta: Swami

Vivekananda Centenary Committee, 1963-1964.

Swidler, Arlene, editor. Homosexuality and World Religions. Valley Forge,

Pennsylvania: Trinity Press International, 1993.

Tanner, Norman. The church and the world : Gaudium et spes, Inter mirifica. New York:

Paulist Press, 2005.

Teasdale, Wayne and George Cairns, editors. The Community of Religions, Voices and

Images of the Parliament of the World’s Religions. New York: Continuum, 1999.

The Columbian Jubilee or Four Centuries of Catholicity in America, being a Historical

and Biographical Retrospect from the Landing of Christopher Columbus to the Chicago

Catholic Congress of 1893. Two Volumes. Chicago, J. S. Hyland and Company, 1894.

The World’s Columbian Catholic Congresses and Educational Exhibit, Volume II.

Chicago: J. S. Hyland and Company, 1893.

Theobald, Christoph. Dans les traces-- de la constitution "Dei verbum" du concile

Vatican II: bible, théologie et pratiques de lecture. Paris : Editions du Cerf, 2009.

325

Thurian, Max. “In the Greatest Respect for all forms of Prayer.” L’Osservatore Romano,

October 22, 1986. In Assisi, World Day of Prayer for Peace, 27 October 1986, edited by

the Pontifical Commission “Iustitia et Pax,” 75-76. Vatican City: Vatican Polygot Press,

1987.

Tikku, Mohan. “After the Swami in Chicago,” The Hindu, February 27, 2011. Accessed

June 25, 2012. http://www.hindu.com/mag/2011/02/27/stories/2011022750310400.htm.

Tisebar, Antonine, O.F.M. Introduction to United States Documents in the Propaganda

Fide Archives, A Calendar, Volume One, edited by Finbar Kenneally, O.F.M., xi-xvi.

Washington, D.C.: Academy of American Franciscan History, 1966.

Toolan, David. “Chicago’s Parliament of Religions,” America 169 (Sept 25, 1993): 3-4.

GALE|A13291489.

Troper, Harold. The Defining Decade. Identity, Politics, and the Canadian Jewish

Community in the 1960s. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2010.

Tuma, Elias H. European economic history: tenth century to the present; theory and

history of economic change. New York : Harper & Row, 1971.

Unquhart, Gordon.The Pope’s Armada. London, Toronto: Bantam Press, 1995.

Urban, Hugh B. The church of scientology: a history of a new religion. Princeton:

Princeton University Press, 2011.

Urdanoz, Teófilo. Historia de la Filosofía, Volumen IV, Siglo XIX: Kant, idealismo y

espiritualismo. Madrid: Biblioteca de Autores Cristianos, 1975.

_______________. Historia de la Filosofía, Volumen V, Siglo XIX: Socialismo,

materialismo y positivismo. Kierkegaard y Nietzsche. Madrid: Biblioteca de Autores

Cristianos, 1975.

Valerio, Adriana. Madri del Concilio, Ventitré Donne al Vaticano II. Roma: Carocci

editore Sfere, 2012.

326

Varacalli, Joseph. The Catholic Experience in America. Westport, Connecticut:

Greenwood Press, 2006.

Vecsey, Christopher, Mark G. Thiel, Marie Therese Archambault, editors. The crossing

of two roads: being Catholic and Native in the United States. Maryknoll, New York:

Orbis Books, 2003.

Viaene, Vincent, editor. The Papacy and the New World Order. Leuven: Leuven

University Press, 2005.

Waldron, David. The sign of the witch: modernity and the pagan revival. Durham, N.C.:

Carolina Academic Press, 2008.

Walsh, James J. “Thomas Dwight.” American Catholic Quarterly Review 37 (1912): 60.

Walter, Philippe. Christianity: the origins of a pagan religion. Rochester, Vt.: Inner

Traditions, 2006.

Wartelle, André, editor. Apologies, Saint Justine: introduction, text critique, translation,

commentary and index. Paris : Études augustiniennes, 1987.

Weber, Max. Protestant Ethics and the Spirit of Capitalism. New York: Scribner, 1958.

Weinzierl, Erika. “Tensions in the Austro-Hungarian Monarchy.” In History of the

Church, Volume IX: The Church in the Industrial Age, edited by Hubert Jedin and John

Dolan, 6-106. New York: Crossroad, 1981.

Weller, Charles Frederick. World Fellowship, Addresses and Messages by leading

spokesmen of all Faiths, Races and Countries. New York: Liveright Publishing

Corporation, 1935.

Willebrands, Card. Johannes. “Assisi: An Ecumenical Event.” In Assisi, World Day of

Prayer for Peace, 27 October 1986, edited by the Pontifical Commission “Iustitia et

Pax,” 167-173. Vatican City: Vatican Polygot Press, 1987.

327

Yamamoto, J. Isamu and Allan W. Gomes. Unification Church. Grand Rapids, Mich.:

Zondervan, 2012.

Young, Alfred. Catholic and Protestant countries compared in civilization, popular

happiness, general intelligence, and morality. New York: the Catholic book exchange,

1894.

Young, John. East-West Synthesis: Matteo Ricci and Confucianism. Hong Kong: Centre

of Asian Studies, 1980.

Zago, Marcello. “Religions for Peace,” L’Osservatore Romano, October 15, 1986. In

Assisi, World Day of Prayer for Peace, 27 October 1986, edited by the Pontifical

Commission “Iustitia et Pax,” 63-70. Vatican City: Vatican Polygot Press, 1987.

Ziolkowski, Eric. A Museum of Faiths: Histories and Legacies of the 1893 World’s

Parliament of Religions. Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1993.

Zwierlein, Frederick J. Letters of Archbishop Corrigan to Bishop McQuaid and Allied

Documents. Rochester, NY: The Art Print Shop, 1946.

_______________. The Life and Letters of Bishop McQuaid. Volume One. Rochester:

The art Print Shop, 1925.

_______________. The Life and Letters of Bishop McQuaid. Volume Two. Rochester:

The art Print Shop, 1926.

_______________. The Life and Letters of Bishop McQuaid. Volume Three. Rochester:

The art Print Shop, 1927.

328

Appendix A

TIMELINE

December 8, 1864 Pope Pius IX issues Syllabus of Errors, which condemns

religious indifferentism.

December 8, 1869 First Vatican Council begins. Council adjourns on October

20, 1870.

September 20, 1889 Charles Carroll Bonney, layman of the Church of the New

Jerusalem, pens a proposal concerning a Parliament of

Religions to be held in the context of Chicago’s World´s

Fair.

October 15, 1889 A general committee of organization is appointed with

Bonney as chairman.

December 31, 1889 Bonney establishes a General Committee on Religious

Congresses and appoints the Rev. John Henry Barrows, a

Presbyterian minister and pastor of the First Presbyterian

Church in Chicago, as its chair.

October 30, 1890 The World’s Congress Auxiliary of the World’s Columbian

Exposition is formed with Bonney as president.

1890 1890 US Census reveals that the Catholic population has

dramatically multiplied from being just 25,000 in 1790 and

1,200,000 in 1840 to overwhelmingly become the largest

religious denomination in the United States.

329

June, 1891 Barrows issues a preliminary invitation to the world to take

part in the Parliament of Religions.

February 25, 1892 Barrows writes first report on the interest his invitation

generated.

March 17, 1892 Barrows sends letter with report enclosed to Cardinal

Mariano Rampolla del Tindaro, the Vatican Secretary of

State, asking for the support of Pope Leo XIII. Apparently,

he receives no response.

Fall 1892 Barrows receives letter of support from Cardinal James

Gibbons of Baltimore in response to a letter Barrows sent

him earlier.

November 16, 1892 The American Archbishops, at their III Annual Meeting in

New York, appoint Bishop John Keane, Rector of the

Catholic University of America, “to make suitable

arrangements with those in charge of the so-called

Parliament of Religions, for hearing twenty Catholic

speakers to be selected by the Rt. Rev. Bishop to expound

Catholic doctrine at their meetings.”

May 1, 1893 Columbian Exhibition opens in Chicago, including

Catholic Educational Exhibit.

September 2, 1893 Catholic Education Day at the Columbian Exhibition.

September 4, 1893 Columbian Catholic Congress begins in Chicago and meets

through September 9, 1893.

330

September 11, 1893 The World’s Parliament of Religions is inaugurated in

Chicago with Cardinal James Gibbons presiding over the

opening ceremony and with Catholic delegates scheduled

to speak every single day of the program. The event is

considered the birth of the modern, global interfaith

movement.

September 12, 1893 Catholic Day at the Parliament with separate full-day

program.

September 28, 1893 The World’s Parliament of Religions adjourns.

October 6, 1893 Apostolic Delegate Archbishop Francesco Satolli reports

positively, but with reservations, on the Parliament of

Religions to Cardinal Miescislao Ledochowski, the prefect

of the Congregation of Propaganda Fide in the Vatican.

July 18, 1895 Pan-American Congress on Religion and Education begins

in Toronto and meets until Thursday, July 25, 1895.

August 12, 1895 Apostolic Delegate Archbishop Francesco Satolli writes to

Cardinal Rampolla asking the Holy See to make a formal

and prohibitory pronouncement about Catholic

involvement in ecumenical and interfaith congresses.

September 18, 1895 Pope Leo answers to Satolli that while meetings of

Catholics with non-Catholics had been prudently tolerated

(ad hunc diem prudenti silentio tolerati sunt), it would be

advisable that Catholics should hold their congresses apart,

a letter used to dispel rumors of Vatican approval of plans

for a Parliament of Religions to be held in Paris in 1900.

331

January 22, 1899 Pope Leo XIII issues Apostolic Letter Testem

Benevolentiae, in which he condemns Americanism.

October 8, 1902 Satolli, now a Cardinal based in Rome, writes to Paul

Carus, of the Parliament Extension Society, discouraging

the latter’s plan of a second Parliament of Religions to be

held in the context of the World’s Expo in St. Louis,

Missouri, in 1904. The Cardinal disapproves of any

Catholic involvement and indicates that such an event

would lead to skepticism and naturalism.

September 7, 1907 Pope Pius X issues encyclical letter Pascendi Dominici

Gregis, condemning Modernism.

June 14, 1910 Edinburgh Missionary Conference begins and meets

through June 23, 1910, formal beginning of the modern,

Protestant Christian ecumenical movement.

September 10, 1910 Anti-Modernist Oath is put into effect by the Vatican.

January 6, 1928 Pope Pius XI issues encyclical Mortalium Animos,

condemning certain aspects of the early ecumenical

movement.

August 27, 1933 International Convention of the World Fellowship of

Faiths, also known as the second Parliament of Religions,

begins in Chicago and meets through September 17, 1933

in the context of the Chicago’s Century of Progress

World’s Fair, without official Catholic representation.

However, prominent lay Catholic Patrick Henry Callahan, a

decorated knight of St. Gregory by Pope Pius XI, gave an

address.

332

January 25, 1959 Pope John XXIII announces convocation of the Second

Vatican Council.

October 11, 1962 Second Vatican Council begins.

May 17, 1964 Vatican establishes Secretariat for Non-Christians.

November 21, 1964 Lumen Gentium Dogmatic Constitution about the Church is

issued by the Council. This document states that non-

Christians and even atheists can be saved if with “no fault

of their own do not know the Gospel of Christ or His

Church, yet sincerely seek God and moved by grace strive

by their deeds to do His will as it is known to them through

the dictates of conscience.”

October 28, 1965 Decree Nostra Aetate about the Church and Non-Christian

Religions is issued by the Council. This document invites

Christians to “acknowledge, preserve and encourage the

spiritual and moral truths found among non-Christians, also

their social life and culture.”

December 7, 1965 Gaudium et Spes Pastoral Constitution about the Church in

the modern world and Declaration Dignitatis Humanae on

religious freedom are issued by the Council. Gaudium et

Spes affirms that “Just as it is in the world's interest to

acknowledge the Church as an historical reality, and to

recognize her good influence, so the Church herself knows

how richly she has profited by the history and development

of humanity.”

December 8, 1965 Second Vatican Council adjourns.

333

November 21, 1982 First documented meeting to share ideas for a centennial

celebration of the World’s Parliament of Religions takes

place at the home of Dr. John Dubocq in Chicago. Swami

Sarveshananda is present accompanied by other

Vendantists, a Buddhist, a Zoroastrian, a Jew, a Christian,

and a Muslim.

January 31, 1983 Early pioneers of the centennial Parliament initiative in

Chicago write to the Chicago World’s Fair 1992

Corporation to ask it to undertake their plans. Eventually,

plans for a Chicago World’s Fair in 1992 fell through.

1983 Cardinal Bernardin of the Archdiocese of Chicago and Dr.

Willard Boyd of the Field Museum write to Dr. Martin

Marty of the University of Chicago, telling him of the

importance of having a 1993 Parliament for Chicago

anyway and asking him to do something. Unsuccessful.

1985 Ammerdown meeting in Bath, England, is convened by the

World Congress of Faiths and the Temple of Understanding

to seek ways of collaboration between international

interfaith organizations.

January 25, 1986 Pope John Paul II announces his initiative of the World

Day of Prayer for Peace.

October 27, 1986 World Day of Prayer for Peace in Assisi is hosted by Pope

John Paul II with leaders of the religions of the world.

1986 Archdiocese of Chicago tries again to launch the

Parliament centennial, this time with the Illinois

Humanities Council. Unsuccessful.

334

March 13, 1988 First documented meeting of ad-hoc committee, an output

of the tireless leadership of Swami Sarveshananda, that

would evolve into the Council for a Parliament of the

World’s Religions. Vedantists, Zoroastrians, and Baha’is

stand out. Professor Dennis McCann of DePaul University

and Sister Joan McGuire of the Office of Ecumenical and

Interreligious Affairs of the Archdiocese of Chicago are

first Catholics involved in this new and eventually

successful initiative.

April, 1988 Ammerdown Conference in Bath, England, is convened by

the World Congress of Faiths and the Temple of

Understanding to plan commemoration of the centennial of

the World´s Parliament of Religions.

July 17, 1988 First Board of Directors of the CPWR is established with

Baha’i Charles Nolley as chair and Zoroastrian Rohinton

Rivetna as vice-chair.

December 15, 1988 Board is informed that Swami Sarveshananda will relocate

to Boston. Buddhist Ron Kidd volunteers to serve in his

place for a few months on a ‘deferred pay’ basis. All Board

members present vote in favor.

March 10, 1989 Hans Küng gives lecture “No peace among the nations

without peace among the religions” at the Rockefeller

chapel of the University of Chicago and calls on those

responsible for planning the centenary celebration of the

1893 Parliament of Religions to proclaim a century later “a

new ethical consensus,” which will evolve into the

document Towards a Global Ethic, An Initial Declaration,

drafted by Küng.

May 9, 1989 The Council of Religious Leaders of Metropolitan Chicago

“looks with favor on the Council for a Parliament of the

World’s Religions without thereby implying agreement

with all of the activities or theological assumptions that

335

may be forthcoming.” Sister Joan McGuire of the

Archdiocese of Chicago is appointed as liaison between the

two councils.

June 22, 1989 Archdiocese of Chicago becomes a co-sponsor of the

Council for a Parliament of the World’s Religions, with the

appointments of Fr. Thomas Baima as a candidate for the

Board, Sister Joan McGuire as an advisor and Ms. Clarisse

Croteau-Chonka as a member of the Program Committee.

Other Catholic co-sponsors will follow in the ensuing

months: Monastic Interreligious Dialogue, the Focolare

Movement, the National Association of Diocesan

Ecumenical Officers, the Institute for Ecumenical and

Cultural Research, the Graymoor Ecumenical and

Interreligious Institute, Chicago’s Catholic Theological

Union, and the Center for the Study of Values at DePaul

University among others.

July 9, 1989 Early pioneer of the centennial idea with Vedantist leanings

Daniel Gómez-Ibáñez succeeds Baha’i Charles Nolley as

chair of the CPWR. Zoroastrian Rohinton Rivetna is re-

elected as vice-chair.

November 4, 1989 Inaugural ceremony to announce the formal planning of the

centennial Parliament takes place at the Rockefeller chapel

of the University of Chicago.

January 17, 1991 Parliament office closed temporarily due to lack of funds.

Despite slow recovery in ensuing months, uncertainty about

Parliament success will remain until the very end of the

planning process.

September 1, 1991 Daniel Gómez-Ibáñez starts as Executive Director of the

Board.

336

September 15, 1991 Presbyterian David Ramage, president of McCormick

Theological Seminary, succeeds Daniel Gómez Ibáñez as

Chair of the Board.

May, 1993 Vatican announces official representative to the Parliament,

Archbishop Francesco Gioia, OFMCap.

August 18-22, 1993 Bangalore Conference "Sharing Visions for the Next

Century," Sarva Dharma Sammelana. Organised by the

International Interfaith Organizations Coordinating

Committee in a unique first global collaboration with four

of the main western interfaith organisations: WCF, IARF,

IIC and WCRP gathering of 600 people actively engaged in

inter-faith work in 28 countries.

August 28, 1993 The Parliament of the World’s Religions begins in

Chicago, the most diverse religious celebration in history,

with strong Catholic participation throughout the event.

Cardinal Bernardin of Chicago presides the Catholic

delegation in the opening ceremony.

August 31, 1993 Address by Cardinal Bernardin on Euthanasia, a

development of the Cardinal’s proposal of a “Consistent

Ethic of Life.”

Memorial for Dom Bede Griffiths of the Shantivanam

ashram in India takes place in the context of the Parliament.

Fr. Griffiths died three months earlier.

Greek Orthodox Diocese of Chicago withdraws from the

Parliament in protest of “pseudo-religious pagan groups

that profess no belief in a God or a Supreme Being.”

337

September 1, 1993 Address by Archbishop Francesco Gioia on the Catholic

Church’s Theology of the Religions.

September 2, 1993 Four Jewish organizations withdraw from the Parliament

due to inclusion in the program of controversial Minister

Louis Farrakhan.

September 4, 1993 Buddhist-Christian Monastic Dialogue session organized

by the Monastic Interreligious Dialogue takes place in the

context of the Parliament with the parlicipation of the Dalai

Lama. The Dalai Lama suggests ongoing meetings between

Buddhist and Catholic monks beyond the Parliament,

which leads to encounters at Gethsemani Abbey in

Kentucky.

September 5, 1993 Document Towards a Global Ethic, An Initial Declaration,

is endorsed by a large number of participants in the

Assembly of Religious and Spiritual Leaders in the context

of the Parliament.

Parliament of the World’s Religions adjourns with Cardinal

Bernardin among officials on the stage.

July 16, 1996 Gethsemani Encounter I organized by the Monastic

Interreligious Dialogue.

October 28, 1999 International Interreligious Assembly “On the Eve of the

Third Millennium. Collaboration among the Different

Religions” takes place in Piazza San Pietro: 200

Participants from 20 different religious traditions from 21

different countries.

338

December 1-8, 1999 Parliament of the World's Religions meets in Capetown,

South Africa, with Catholic participation. Theme: A New

Day Dawning: Spiritual Yearnings and Sacred Possibilities.

August 6, 2000 Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith in the

Vatican issues Declaration Dominus Iesus on the

uniqueness of Jesus Christ and the Church.

January 24, 2002 Pope John Paul II hosts second Assisi gathering, after

September 11 attacks

April 13-18, 2002 Gethsemani Encounter II organized by the Monastic

Interreligious Dialogue.

July 7-13, 2004 Parliament of the World's Religions meets in Barcelona,

Spain, with Catholic participation. Theme: Pathways to

Peace: The Wisdom of Listening, The Power of

Commitment.

May 27-31, 2008 Gethsemani Encounter III organized by the Monastic

Interreligious Dialogue.

December 3-9, 2009 Parliament of the World’s Religions meets in Melbourne,

Australia, with Catholic participation. Theme: Make a

World of Difference: Hearing each other, Healing the

Earth.

October 27, 2011 Pope Benedict XVI hosts World Day of Prayer for Peace in

Assisi to commemorate the XXV anniversary of first Assisi

gathering.

339

2014 Parliament of the World’s Religions will take place in

Brussels, Belgium.

340

Appendix B

CATHOLICS IN CHICAGO’S

1893 PARLIAMENT OF RELIGIONS PROGRAM1

Tuesday, September 12 Day’s Theme: Existence and Attributes of God

“Rational Demonstrations of the Being of God” by Fr. Augustine F. Hewitt.

Fr. Hewitt (1820-1897) was a former Rector of the Paulist College in Washington, DC,

and, at the time of the Parliament, he was the second superior general in New York,

succeeding in this post the founder of the community, Fr. Isaac Hecker. Born to

Congregationalist parents, Hewitt became an Episcopalian and eventually converted to

Catholicism. Once a Catholic, he became a priest of the Redemptorist congregation and a

founding member of the Paulists when they split from the Redemptorists. His paper was

read by Paulist Fr. Walter Elliott.

Wednesday, September 13 Day’s Theme: Nature of Man

“Man from a Christian Point of View” by Fr. Thomas Byrne

Fr. Thomas Byrne (1841-1923) was the President of St. Mary’s Seminary in Cincinnati,

Ohio, and was appointed the fifth Bishop of Nashville, Tennesee, eight months after the

Parliament.

1 No parliament scholar has compiled a complete list of Catholic participants at the 1893 event so

far. James Cleary and Dennis McCann provide helpful but incomplete lists. See James Cleary,

“Catholic Participation in the World’s Parliament of Religions,” The Catholic Historical Review,

55, 4 (1970): 608-609, and McCann, Dennis P., “Catholics at the Parliament: An Americanist

Breakthrough,” unpublished paper presented at the American Academy of Religion Annual

Meeting, Section: The 1893 Parliament of Religions: New Voices from the Margins, 22-23

November, 1991, in Archives of the Council for a Parliament of the World’s Religions

(ACPWR), Box 21A, Folder McCann. An invaluable resource, probably not available to Cleary

and McCann, is the official Catholic program at the Parliament, published by Bishop John Keane

one week prior to the event. See “World’s Religious Parliament, Programme for the

Representation of the Catholic Church,” The New York Times, August 27, 1893, accessed June

25, 2012, http://query.nytimes.com/mem/archive-

free/pdf?res=9D00E2DB163EEF33A25754C2A96E9C94629ED7CF.

341

“The Supreme End and Office of Religion” by Father Walter Elliott.

Fr. Walter Elliott (1842-1928) was a Paulist missionary to American non-Catholics and

two years prior to the Parliament published a biography of the Paulist founder, Fr.

Hecker, a book that would eventually be at the center of the Americanist controversy. Fr.

Elliott´s topic corresponded to the theme of the following day, when his lecture was

originally scheduled. However, for some reason it was rescheduled for this day.

Thursday, September 14 Day’s Theme: Necessity of Religion

“The Needs of Humanity Supplied by the Catholic Religion” by Cardinal James Gibbons.

Cardinal James Gibbons (1834-1921) was the Archbishop of Baltimore. He was the most

prominent and among the most influential Catholic leaders in the United States at the

time of the 1893 Parliament. He was elevated to the rank of cardinal one year after the

death of his only predecessor holding that ecclesiastical dignity in the United States, John

Cardinal McCloskey from New York. Gibbons exercised his leadership of the Catholic

Church during very controversial times inside the Church concerning the relation

between Catholic identity and American citizenship. Ellis, Gibbons’ biographer, states

that the Cardinal was not feeling well, so the address was read by Bishop Keane.

Friday, September 15 Day’s Theme: Systems of Religions

“The Comparative Study of the World’s Religions” by Monsignor Charles de Harlez.

Msgr. Charles de Harlez (1832-1899) was a Belgian Orientalist of repute in European

academic circles and the Rector of the Justus Lipsius College at the Catholic University

of Louvain. He was one of several European scholars of comparative religion that sent

addresses to be read at the Parliament. Others included Max Müller, J. Estlin Carpenter,

Albert and Jean Réville, and C.P. Tiele. De Harlez’s paper was read by Fr. Daniel

Riordan, a priest of the Archdiocese of Chicago. Bishop Keane’s acquaintance with de

Harlez probably dates from Keane’s visit to Catholic universities in Europe after his

appointment as rector of the Catholic University of America.

Saturday, September 16 Day’s Theme: Sacred Scriptures of the World

“The Catholic Church and the Bible” by Msgr. Robert Seton.

342

Msgr. Robert Seton (1839-1927) was the Rector of St. Joseph’s Church in Jersey City,

New Jersey, and a professor at Seton Hall College. He carried with him the honor of

being the grandson of Elizabeth Seton, who would become the first American canonized

saint, a convert to Catholicism from the Episcopal Church. He eventually relocated to

Rome and was made the Archbishop of Heliopolis, a virtual diocese, in recognition of his

lifetime service to the Church.

Sunday, September 17 Day’s Theme: Religion in Social and Married Life

“The Catholic Church and the Marriage Bond” by Professor Martin J. Wade

Professor Martin Wade (1861-1931), an Iowa Lawyer and lecturer at the University of

Iowa College of Law, was the first lay Catholic to address the Parliament. He eventually

became a one-term Democratic Party representative in Congress.

“The Religious Training of Children” by Brother Azarias Mullany, FSC.

Brother Azarias Mullany (1847-1893) spent thirty years as a member of the religious

congregation of the Brothers of the Christian Schools and died just three weeks before the

Parliament was convened. His paper was read by his biological brother John Mullany, a

member of the same religious congregation. He had been expected to present another

paper at the Catholic Congress the week before. Another member from this educational

order, Brother Maurelian, was in charge of the Catholic Educational Exhibit at the

Exposition’s grounds.

Monday, September 18 Day’s Theme: Great Teachers of Religion

“The Incarnation Idea in History and in Jesus Christ” by Bishop John Keane.

Bishop John Keane (1839-1918) was the Rector of the Catholic University of America.

Before and after his rectorship he served as the Bishop of Richmond and as the

Archbishop of Dubuque respectively. This talk was originally assigned to Fr. Dr.

Carsartelli, the President of St. Bede’s College in Manchester, England, who would

eventually become the first Italian Bishop of Salford and Manchester.

Tuesday, September 19 Day’s Theme: Religion, Art, and Science

“Man in the Light of Science and Religion” by Professor Thomas Dwight.

343

Dr. Thomas Dwight (1843-1911) was the Parkman Professor of Anatomy at Harvard

Medical School. A convert to Catholicism at the age of 13, he was the second lay

Catholic whose ideas were presented to the Parliament. His paper was read by Bishop

Keane.

Wednesday, September 20 Day’s Theme: Working Forces of Religion

“The Redemption of Sinful Man through Jesus Christ” by Father Daniel Kennedy, O.P.

Fr. Kennedy was a Dominican Friar from St. Joseph College in Ohio. This paper was

originally assigned by Keane to another Dominican Friar, A. V. Higgins from New

Haven, Connecticut.

“The Basis of Right, Duty, and Law,” by Fr. Thomas Bouquillon.

Fr. Bouquillon was a Professor at the Catholic University of America. This lecture was

cancelled.

Thursday, September 21 Day’s Theme: Religion and Social Problems

“The Relation of the Roman Catholic Church to the Poor and the Destitute” by the

Honorable Charles Donnelly.

Mr. Donnelly was a known philanthropist and President of the Board of the House of the

Good Shepherd in Boston (Roxbury), a refuge for the reformation of “fallen” women and

girls. He was the third layman representing the Catholic Church at the Parliament. His

paper was read by Bishop Keane.

“Religion and Labor” by Fr. James M. Cleary.

Fr. James Cleary (1849-1933) was a close friend of Archbishop Ireland and, like Ireland,

a champion of temperance. He was the pastor of the Church of St. Charles Borromeo in

Minneapolis. Eventually he was named a monsignor and the founder and pastor of the

Church of the Incarnation in Minneapolis.

“The Child Waifs of our Great Cities” by Msgr. Gadd from Manchester, England

(Cancelled).

344

Friday, September 22 Day’s Theme: Civil Society

“The Catholic Church and the Negro Race” by Fr. John Slattery, CSJ.

Fr. John Slattery was the founder and rector of St. Joseph Seminary in Baltimore, MD,

the house of formation of the religious congregation of the same name devoted to the

pastoral care of Blacks in the United States, a cause of which he is considered by some a

“foremost champion” and a prophet within the Catholic Church. He was an outspoken

opponent of “what he called the ‘uncatholic’ opposition to the ordination of Black men

to the priesthood.” Fr. Slattery had also delivered a lecture the previous week in the

Catholic Congress.

“The Sacredness of Civil Authority and Law” by Archbishop John Ireland.

John Ireland (1838-1918) was the Archbishop of St. Paul, Minnessota. Ireland was an

influential advocate for the compatibility of the Catholic faith and the American spirit of

freedom, democracy and social change. Surprisingly, the plans of this lecture changed

and he never formally addressed the Parliament as part of the general program. His only

formal address at the Parliament took place on Catholic Day.

Saturday, September 23 Day’s Theme: Love of Humanity

“A Catholic View of Arbitration instead of War” by the Honorable Thomas J. Semmes.

Dr. Thomas Semmes (1824-1899) was a Louisiana lawyer and a politician. He was

omitted on James Cleary’s list.

Sunday, September 24 Day’s Theme: Christianity and American Civilization

“The Relation of Christianity to America” by Fr. Thomas O’Gorman.

Fr. Thomas O’Gorman (1843-1921) was professor of ecclesiastical history at the Catholic

University in Washington, DC, after having experimented with the Paulists for four years

and served as the first rector of St. Thomas Aquinas Seminary, established by his lifelong

friend Archbishop Ireland in St. Paul, Minnesota. Two and a half years after the

345

Parliament, he was appointed the second bishop of Sioux Falls in South Dakota, a

position he held until his death. McCann mistakenly lists him as a layman.

Monday, September 25 Day’s Theme: Interdenominational Comity

“Principles and Means of the Religious Reunion of Christendom” by Passionist Father

Fidelis Kent Stone (Cancelled).

Fr. Fidelis Stone (1840-1921) would have been the only Catholic representative at the

Parliament from South America. The son of the Dean of the Episcopal School of

Theology in Cambridge, Massachusetts, educated at Harvard and Göttigen in Germany,

and a married Episcopal priest with two daughters, Stone converted to Catholicism soon

after his wife died. He joined the Paulist Fathers after entrusting the care of his daughters

to the Sisters of Mercy. He eventually left the Paulists and entered the Congregation of

the Passionists, where he played a key role in establishing that religious community in

Argentina. Fr. Stone was a remarkable orator. He probably impressed Keane when he

spoke at the foundation ceremony of the Catholic University of America. It was certainly

a loss for the Parliament not to have counted on his contribution. Only day on which

there was not a Catholic address.

Tuesday, September 26 Day’s Theme: Attitude of Christianity to other religions

“Primitive and Prospective Religious Union of the Human Family” by Fr. John Gmeiner.

Fr. John Gmeiner (1847-1913) was the pastor of St. Peter’s Church, the oldest church in

the state of Minnesota. He was also a professor in St. Francis Seminary near Milwaukee

and the author of several works, particularly “Modern Scientific Views and Christian

Doctrines Compared.”

Wednesday, September 27 Day’s Theme: the Parliament itself

“The Ultimate Religion,” by Bishop John Keane.

346

Catholic Day at the 1893 Parliament of Religions

September 12, 1893

Morning session

“The Catholic Idea of Dogmatic Truth,” by Fr. William Byrne (1832-1912), the Vicar

General of the Archdiocese of Boston, also known as the second Founder of Mount Saint

Mary’s College in Emmitsburg, Maryland.

“The Catholic Idea of Worship and Grace,” originally assigned to absentee Fr. Fidelis

Kent Stone, who was replaced by Fr. Thomas O´Gorman.

“The Catholic Idea of Holiness and Perfection,” by Fr. Thomas Sherman (1856-1933),

from St. Louis University in St. Louis, Missouri, and the only Jesuit involved in the 1893

Parliament. Sherman’s participation is particularly significant because Jesuits from

France and Italy proved harshly critical of the Parliament and of the Catholic

involvement in it. As for Fr. Sherman, the son of prominent American General William

Tecumseh Sherman and a notable orator, in his mid-fifties he had a mental breakdown

and distanced himself from the Jesuit Order but asked to renew his vows prior to his

death at the age of seventy-seven.

Afternoon session

“Jesus Christ, the Founder of Truth, Grace, and Holiness,” by Bishop Keane.

“The Church, the Organ of Jesus Christ for the Dispensation of Truth, Grace, and

Holiness,” by Bishop John Watterson of Columbus, Ohio. Bishop Watterson´s family

was originally Episcopalian until his grandfather converted to Catholicism.

Evening session

“The Church and the Doctrinal Development of the same,” by Archbishop Placide

Chapelle from Santa Fe, New Mexico. Four years after the Parliament, Archbishop

Chapelle was transferred from Santa Fe to New Orleans and eventually was appointed

Apostolic Delegate for Cuba and Puerto Rico and extraordinary envoy to the Philippines.

“Fitness of the Catholic Religion for the Actualities of Modern Life,” by Archbishop

Ireland, in his only formal address at the Parliament.

“The Mission of the Church to All the Races of Mankind,” by Archbishop Redwood from

New Zealand, which Keane had originally assigned to Cardinal Moran from Sydney. This

suggests that Redwood came in his place.

347

Appendix C

CATHOLIC PARTICIPATION IN

THE 1993 PARLIAMENT OF THE WORLD’S RELIGIONS1

Catholic President of the 1993 Parliament of the World’s Religions2

Rev. Theodore M. Hesburgh, C.S.C., President Emeritus, Notre Dame University. Active

in the cause of world peace since retirement.

1993 Parliament of the World’s Religions Catholic Co-Sponsors3

Archdiocese of Chicago

Call to Action, Chicago

Catholic Theological Union, Chicago

Center for the Study of Values, DePaul University, Chicago

Focolare Movement, Chicago

Institute for Ecumenical and Cultural Research, Collegeville, Minnesota

Monastic Inter-religious Dialogue, Saint Joseph, Minnesota/Lisle, Illinois

National Association of Diocesan Ecumenical Officers, St. Louis, Missouri

1 Information based on the Parliament of the World’s Religions Program Catalogue (Chicago:

Council for a Parliament of the World´s Religions, 1993); Archives of the Council for a

Parliament of the World´s Religions, Boxes 33, 34A, 34 B Delegates Biographies, Box 35A VIP

Assembly members, Box 35B VIP Contact Lists, Box 40 Independent Presenters; and on Thomas

Baima, “White Paper on the Role of the Archdiocese of Chicago in the Parliament of the World´s

Religions,” confided to the writer by the Office of Ecumenical and Interfaith Affairs of the

Archdiocese of Chicago, n-d. Their brief profiles correspond to their activities and position at the

time of the 1993 Parliament.

2 One Catholic out of 25 Presidents

3 Twelve Catholic institutions out of 198 Co-Sponsors

348

Saint Benedict Center Interfaith Dialogue Group, Madison, Wisconsin

Saint Isidore´s Roman Catholic Church, Bloomingdale, Illinois

Saint John De La Salle Roman Catholic Parish, Chicago

The Graymoor Ecumenical and Interreligious Institute, New York City, New York

1993 Parliament of the World’s Religions Catholic Donors

Archdiocese of Chicago

Most Reverend Plácido Rodríguez, Auxiliary Bishop of Chicago

1993 Parliament of the World’s Religions

Catholic Members of the Board of Trustees, 1992-1993

Mr. Jim Kenney, Vice-Chair, Executive Director, Common Ground, Chicago

Fr. Thomas Baima, Director, Office of Ecumenical and Interreligious Affairs,

Archdiocese of Chicago

Most Reverend Plácido Rodríguez, Auxiliary Bishop of Chicago

Catholic Trustees-Elect

Dr. Jeffrey Carlson, Professor of Religious Studies, DePaul University, Chicago

Br. Wayne Teasdale, Christian sannyasi in the lineage of Fr. Bede Griffiths

Catholic Former Trustees

Dr. Dennis McCann, Professor of Ethics at DePaul University, Chicago

349

Catholic Office Volunteer

Br. Ted Funk, Xaverian brother

Catholics in the Plenary Sessions

Saturday, August 28

Opening Plenary

Mayor Richard M. Daley, Mayor of Chicago, Honorary Chairperson

Introduction

His Eminence Joseph Cardinal Bernardin, Archbishop of Chicago

Invocation

Interfaith Understanding

Dr. Robert Müller, Chancellor for the United Nations University for Peace;

honorary chair, Congress of the Spirit for the Americas

Address: Interfaith Harmony and Understanding

Burton Pretty On Top, Crow Nation; spiritual leader and pipe carrier

Respondent

Sunday, August 29

What Shall We Do?

Most Reverend Samuel Ruiz García, Bishop of Chiapas, Mexico

Response

Visions of Paradise and Possibility

Fr. Thomas Baima, priest of the Archdiocese of Chicago and Director of

Ecumenical and Interreligious Affairs; trustee of the Council for a Parliament of

the World’s Religions

Reader

350

Monday, August 30

Voices of the Dispossesed

Most Rev. Willie Romelus, Bishop, Diocese of Jérémie in Haiti

Personal Story and Testimony

Fr. Thomas Kocherry, Redemptorist priest, President of the National Fish

Workers Federation in India, bringing all fish workers along the coastline of India

together and organizing them against the big mechanized trawlers that are

monopolizing the waters, and others

Personal Story and Testimony

Fr. Yvon Masaac, parish of Fermathe, Haiti

A song of Haiti (Creole)

Voices of Spirit and Tradition

David Steindl-Rast, OSB, Benedictine monk, advisor to MID

Passage

Russill Paul D’Silva, Disciple of Fr. Bede Griffiths, composer, musician and

vocalist, and Asha Paul D’Silva, Disciple of Fr. Bede Griffiths

Musical Performance

From Vision to Action

Brian Muldoon, attorney involved in conflict resolution work through the

Dearborn Institute

Introduction of the Parliament of the People

Treasure Map of the Parliament Program

Tuesday, August 31

The Inner Life

Jim Kenney, Co-founder and Executive Director, Common Ground interfaith

study center

Introduction

351

Russill Paul D’Silva, Disciple of Fr. Bede Griffiths, composer, musician and

vocalist

Musical accompaniment

Friday, September 3

The Next Generation

Catholic participation from Benet Academy and other schools

Saturday, September 4

Closing Plenary

Joseph Cardinal Bernardin, Archbishop of Chicago, and Catholic trustees of the

Council for a Parliament of the World´s Religions

Catholics in Major Presentations4

Tuesday, August 31

David Steindl-Rast, OSB, Benedictine monk, advisor to MID, among others

An Introduction to Joseph Campbell

Joseph Cardinal Bernardin, Archbishop of Chicago, senior prelate among US Catholic

Bishops

Euthanasia

Helen Alvare, Director of Planning and Information of the Secretariat for Pro-Life

Activities of the National Conference of Catholic Bishops

Human Population and Women

Dr. Hans Küng, Director of the Ecumenical Institute at Tübingen University in Germany

Reflections on the 1993 Parliament of the World’s Religions

4 Catholics were engaged as presenters in 18 out of 175 Major Presentations; in 13 as sole

presenters; in 5 as co-presenters with non-Catholics.

352

Fr. John Martin Kuvarapu, from Fr. Bede Griffith´s Saccidananda Ashram, India

Fr. Thomas Matus, Camaldolese Monk

Professor Raimundo Panikkar, Professor Emeritus, University of California, Santa

Barbara

Sr. Pascaline Coff, O.S.B. PhD, Founder and Director of Osage Monastery in Sand

Springs, Oklahoma

Fr. John Killian, priest of the Diocese of Buffalo, Attica, NY.

Russill Paul D’Silva, Disciple of Fr. Bede Griffiths, composer, musician and vocalist

Asha Paul D’Silva, Disciple of Fr. Bede Griffiths

Roland Ropers, Oblate of the Order of St. Benedict and friend of Fr. Bede Griffiths

Br. Wayne Teasdale, Christian sannyasi in the lineage of Fr. Bede Griffiths

Father Bruno Barnhardt, Camaldolese monk, member of MID

And others

Bede Griffiths –Swami Dayananda- Visionary Guide and Universal Saint

Bishop Willie Romelus, Diocese of Jérémie in Haiti

The Role and Responsibility of the Church in Haiti

Wednesday, September 1

Prof. Ewart Cousins, Professor of Theology, Fordham University; General Editor of the

twenty-five volume series, World Spirituality; former consultant to the Vatican

Secretariat on Inter-Religious Dialogue

The Christ of the Twenty-First Century

Most Rev. Francesco Gioa, Delegate, Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue,

Vatican City, former Archbishop of Camerino, San Severino Marche

The Catholic Church’s Theology of Religions

Rev. Dr. Enzo Maria Fondi, one of the originators of the Focolare Movement in Italy and

in the former German Democratic Republic; now a central director of the movement

For a United Word: An Experience of 50 Years

353

John Carr, Secretary for Social Development and World Peace of the United States

Catholic Conference

100 Years of Social and Economic Theology

Thursday, September 2

Thomas Berry, historian of religions and writer with special concern for the foundation of

cultures in their relations with the natural world

The Cosmology of Religions

Rev. Dr. Cesar A. Davila, founder and president of the Yoga and Christianity Movement

in the Americas

East and West in a Spiritual Embrace

Friday, September 3

Burton Pretty On Top, Crow Nation; spiritual leader and pipe carrier, among others

Native American Holy Land, Sacred Sites, Religious Freedom

Sister Pascaline Coff, O.S.B. PhD, Founder and Director of Osage Monastery in Sand

Springs, Oklahoma, among others

Spirituality and Healing

David Steindl-Rast, OSB, Benedictine monk, advisor to MID, among others

The Great Circle Dance: Religions and the Religions

Dr. Henry Charles, Assistant Professor, St. Louis University (Department of Theological

Studies)

Perspectives for a Post-Colonial Caribbean Church

Jim Kenney, Co-founder and Executive Director, Common Ground interfaith study center

Convergence: The Sacred Wheel

Saturday, September 4

Fr. Julian von Duerbeck, Benedictine monk of St. Procopius Abbey, Lisle, IL; member of

MID

Br. Wayne Teasdale, Christian sannyasi (monk, renunciate) in the lineage of Fr. Bede

Griffiths, member of MID

354

Sr. Joanna Becker, Benedictine nun at St. Benedict’s Convent, St. Joseph, MN, member

of MID

David Steindl-Rast, OSB, Benedictine monk, advisor to MID

Dr. Patrick Henry, Executive Director, Institute for Ecumenical and Cultural Research in

Collegeville, MN

Fr. Thomas Keating, OCSO, Former Abbot of St. Joseph’s Abbey, Spencer, MA; Former

Chair, North American Board East-West Dialogue; absent

Fr. James Connor, OCSO, Trappist monk of the Abbey of Gethsemani, Kentucky,

member of MID and editor of its publication, Bulletin

Among others, including His Holiness the Dalai Lama

Buddhist-Christian Monastic Dialogue: Sunyata and Kenosis –the Uiversal

Arising of Compassion in the Spiritual Journey

Catholics in Seminars & Lectures5

Tuesday, August 31

Dr. Mary Evelyn Tucker, historian of religions (Confucianism in Japan)

World Views and Ecology

Sister Charlene Altemose, Missionary Sister of the Sacred Heart, Fullbright Scholar in

India

Christian Reflections on the Bhagavat-Gita

Mr. Francis P. Hannigan, Director of the Family Ministries Office of the Catholic

Archdiocese of Chicago

Putting Children and Families First: The Tradition Continues

Virginia Ann Froehle, Sister of Mercy and author

Praying with Feminine Images of God

5 Catholics were engaged as presenters in 69 out of 454 Seminars and Lectures; in 41 as sole

presenters; in 28 as co-presenters with non-Catholics.

355

Dr. Elizabeth Ferrero, St. Thomas University, Miami, among others

Global Stewardship: Consumption, Population and Technology Issues.

Leadership

Rev. Michael McGarry, priest of the Congregation of Saint Paul and Rector, St. Paul

College, Washington, DC. Member of NADEO

What do Christians and Jews have to say to Each Other?

Richard J. Payne, editor, publisher, conceived and developed the 75-volume The Classics

of Western Spirituality, the 25-volume World Spirituality: An Encyclopedic History of the

Religious Quest, and the forthcoming 60-volume The Classics of Eastern Spirituality;

Executive Director, the Arcadian Institute, Rockport, MA

Prof. Ewart Cousins, Professor of Theology, Fordham University; General Editor of the

twenty-five volume series, World Spirituality; former consultant to the Vatican

Secretariat on Inter-Religious Dialogue

The God Who is Love and the Personalist Traditions of Spirituality

Jim Kenney, Co-founder and Executive Director, Common Ground interfaith study

center, and Rabbi Herbert Bronstein

Mystic Goal-lessness: Where the Traditions Meet

Burton Pretty On Top, Crow Nation; spiritual leader and pipe carrier, among others

The Strength of the Native American Extended Family Network

Elizabeth Espersen, Executive Director, Thanks-Giving Square, Dallas, Texas, national

and international programs; Co-Chair of North American Interfaith Network

Dr. Robert Muller, Chancellor for the United Nations University for Peace; honorary

chair, Congress of the Spirit for the Americas

Congress for the Spirit for the Americas: A Contribution to a New Spiritual

World Order

Fr. Thomas Baima, priest of the Archdiocese of Chicago and Director of Ecumenical and

Interreligious Affairs; trustee of the Council for a Parliament of the World’s Religions

Techniques of Meditation

Fr. Albert Fritsch, SJ, Director of Earth Healing

Earth Healing as a component of Agri-Spirituality

356

David Toolan, SJ, associate editor of AMERICA magazine

A Beneficial Conflict: Science vs. Christianity in Western Culture

Burton Pretty On Top, Crow Nation; spiritual leader and pipe carrier, among others

500 Years of Survival –All Treaties Were Broken, and the Spirituality Survives

Fr. David Tracy, Professor at the University of Chicago

David Steindl-Rast, OSB, Benedictine monk, advisor to MID, among others

Vocabulary for the 21st Century

Sister Miriam Brown, OP, Executive Director, Churches’ Center for Land and People, an

ecumenical organization that brings together individuals, churches, and organizations in

Wisconsin, Iowa, and Illinois, around concerns for ethics, renewal, stewardship, and

ministry

Fr. Richard Ament, Rural pastor, team of five parishes, among others

Rural Spirituality: Sustaining the Land, Sharing the Spirit

Wednesday, September 1

Albert LaChance, husband, father, poet, environmentalist, therapist, lecturer; co-founder

with his wife, Carol, of Greenspirit Center in New Hampshire; author of Greenspirit:

Twelve Step in Ecological Spirituality, a book highly recommended by Thomas Berry as

a practical extension of his own work

Greenspirit: A Marriage of Ecology and Multi-Faith Spirituality

F. Byron (Ron) Nahser, President and CEO, Frank C. Nahser, Inc. B.A., Notre Dame

University, M.A., Mundelein College, PhD, De Paul University. And Buddhist priest

Steve Kizan Beck

Contemplative Dwelling II: Alternative Business Enterprise, Universally

Affordable Dwelling, Contemplative Practice and Planetary Harmony

Carolyn Ford, Peace and Justice Director at St. Isidore Roman Catholic Church, Diocese

of Joliet, and Canadian Peter H. Ayroyd

The Road from Rio: An Ecological and Spiritual Perspective

Suzanne Zuercher, OSB, licensed psychologist, author on two books on the enneagram,

former co-director of Institute of Spiritual Leadership at Loyola University

Thomas Merton and the Enneagram

357

Thomas Kocherry, Redemptorist priest, President of the National Fish Workers

Federation in India, bringing all fish workers along the coastline of India together and

organizing them against the big mechanized trawlers that are monopolizing the waters,

and others

In the Wake of Freedom: Human Rights and Development in India

Dr. William French, Professor of Theology, Loyola University, Chicago

Dr. John Pawlikowski, OSM, Professor of Social Ethics, Catholic Theological Union

And others

Religion and Peacemaking: Regarding the Other –Narratives of Compassion

Rev. Peter Dougherty, priest of the Roman Catholic Diocese of Lansing, Michigan,

founder of Covenant for Peace, a faith-based peace community that focuses on the

dangers of the nuclear arms race

Stories of Faith-Based Social Action in 1993

Dr. John Kaserow, Maryknoll priest, Professor of Mission, Catholic Theological Union,

Chicago

The Critical Issues –A Multi Media View

Fr. Julian von Duerbeck, OSB, Benedictine Monk of St. Procopius Abbey, Lisle, Il, and

Rabbi Herbert Bronstein

Workshop on Comparative Liturgy: Session I

Fr. Thomas Kane, Paulist priest, Professor of Theology at the Weston School of

Theology in Cambridge, MA

The Inculturation of Christianity in Africa

Elizabeth Ferrero, St. Thomas University, Miami, among others

Global Stewardship: Consumption, Population and Technology Issues. Grassroots

Mary Southard, CSJ, Sister of St. Joseph of La Grange, co-founder and co-director of

SpiritEarth, Center for the Sacred Universe, New England

Endangered Earth/Sacred Earth: Challenge to World Religions

358

Robert Müller, Chancellor, Universidad para la Paz –Costa Rica; author, New Genesis,

Shaping a Global Spirituality, among others

An Invitation to Auroville: The City of Human Unity Emerging in India

Dr. John Renard, Professor of Theology, St. Louis University; member of NADEO

And others

What do Christians and Muslims have to say to each other?

Dr. John Kaserow, Maryknoll priest, Professor of Mission, catholic Theological Union,

Chicago

When the Indigenous Traditions of the World Come Here

Thomas Berry, historian of religions and writer with special concern for the foundation of

cultures in their relations with the natural world, and Rev. Finley Shaef

Ritual in the Ecological Age

Regina Sara Ryan, MA, former Catholic nun, coordinator of the First Conference on

Crazy Wisdom and Divine Madness in 1992

The New Family: Non-Monastic Religious/Spiritual Community

Dr. Daniel Martin, Roman Catholic priest. Founder/Director, International Coordinating

Committee on Religion and the Earth, and others

The Significance of an Earth Charter

Hanne Marstrad Strong, President Manitou Foundation, originally from Denmark; a

Lutheran raised as a Roman Catholic

Major Ecumenical Community in North America

Rev. Gilbert G. Hardy, Cistercian Monk, Professor of Philosophy at the University of

Dallas

Monastic Quest and Interreligious Dialogue

Dr. William French, Professor of Theology, Loyola University, Chicago, and others

Religion and Peace Making: Conflicting Loyalties and the Common Good

359

Dr. Catherine Wessinger, Religious Studies scholar associated with Loyola University,

New Orleans

Women’s Religious Leadership in America

Thursday, September 2

Dr. Daniel Martin, Roman Catholic priest. Founder/Director, International Coordinating

Committee on Religion and the Earth, and others

The Earth Charter as a Tool for Transformation

Elizabeth Espersen, Executive Director, Thanks-Giving Square, Dallas, Texas, national

and international programs; Co-Chair of North American Interfaith Network, and

Zoroastrian Dr. Jamsheed Mavalwala

A Look at NAIN, the North American Interfaith Network

Br. Wayne Teasdale, Christian sannyasi in the lineage of Fr. Bede Griffiths

Rev. Paul Manship, Director Hispanic Youth Ministry, R.C. Diocese of Springfield, MA

Russill Paul D’Silva, Disciple of Fr. Bede Griffiths, composer, musician and vocalist

Asha Paul D’Silva, Disciple of Fr. Bede Griffiths

Father Bruno Barnhardt, Camaldolese monk, member of MID

And others

Towards a Civilization with a Heart

Charles Strain, Professor of Religious Studies, DePaul University, and John Lawlor,

ordained Dharma teacher in the lineage of the Ven. Thich Nhat Hanh

Catholic Social Teaching: What we have to learn from other religions

Sister Margaret Boyle, Sister of Our Lady of Zion, Chair of the DuPage Interfaith

Resource Network, former member of Christian-Jewish Dialogue of Toronto, Canadian

Council of Christians and Jews, and others

The Interfaith Frontier: Suburbia USA

Carolyn Ford, Peace and Justice Director at St. Isidore Roman Catholic Church, Diocese

of Joliet

Ecofeminism and the Return of the Female Principle

360

Krystyna Zambrzycki, American-European Consultant of the Archdiocese of Chicago,

and Dr. Byron Sherwin, Vice President and Professor at Chicago´s Spertus College of

Judaica

Jews and Poles: An Effective Model for Interreligious and Interethnic Dialogue

Prioress Margaret Mary Funk, OSB, Superior of Our Lady of Grace Monastery, member

of Contemplative Outreach, member of Board of Directors of MID

Contemplative Prayer in Catholicism

Dr. Dennis McCann, Professor of Ethics at DePaul University, Chicago

Business Ethics

James Kavanaugh, PhD, former Catholic priest, poet and author

The Journey from Fanaticism and Fundamentalism to Freedom

Krystyna Zambrzycki, American-European Consultant of the Archdiocese of Chicago,

Office of Ethnic Ministries

Sheila Adams, African American Consultant of the Archdiocese of Chicago

Sr. Dominga Zapata, Society of Helpers, Hispanic and Native American Consultant of

the Archdiocese of Chicago

Teresita Nuval, Asian American Consultant of the Archdiocese of Chicago

Popular Religiosity in Chicago

Edwina Gateley, Catholic lay minister; founder, Volunteer Missionary Movement, which

has sent over 1000 men and women to serve in developing countries, and Genesis House,

which serves women in prostitution

The World´s Oldest Oppression –Women in Prostitution

Jo-Ellen Karstens –member of the Focolare Movement

Mini-Cities Throughout the World: Models for a New Society

Mary A. Hallan, director of Respect Life Activities for the Archdiocese of Chicago

Human Life at the Margin –Women and Feminine Dignity

361

Friday, September 3

Ms. Pat Smuck, Catholic laywoman; member, National Council of Catholic women

Ecology as a Woman’s Concern

Dr. Daniel Martin, Roman Catholic priest. Founder/Director, International Coordinating

Committee on Religion and the Earth

Reconecting with the Divine: In Your Self, In All Those You Meet Today, In All

Creation: Part III

Donald Mitchell, Professor of comparative philosophy, Purdue University

What Do Christians and Buddhists Have to Sat to Each Other?

Fr. Julian von Duerbeck, OSB, Benedictine Monk of St. Procopius Abbey, Lisle, Il

Workshop on Comparative Liturgy: Session III

Professor Hans Küng, Director of the Ecumenical Institute at Túbingen University in

Germany; Dr. Mahmous Ayoub, Dr. Hussein Morsi, and Rev. Jack Cory

Christian-Muslim Dialogue

Fr. Roy Drake, SJ, Expert on drug and alcohol abuse, and Robert Serafini

Gobind Sadan USA: Demonstrating Interfaith Commitment, From Shared

Worship to Shared Service

Fr. Thomas Ryan, Paulist priest, Director of the Canadian Centre for Ecumenism in

Montreal, Canada

Riches from Other Faiths

Mary-Anne Langton, Co-Director of Office of Persons with Disabilities of the Roman

Catholic Archdiocese of Hartford

Claire Langton, the mother of a young woman with cerebral palsy, and others

Restoring the Shattered Community for People with Disabilities

Regina Sara Ryan, former Catholic nun

Crazy Wisdom: A Necessity of Our Times

362

Rev. Louis Cameli, priest of the Archdiocese of Chicago, member of the Catholic

Theological Society of America, and the Midwest Assc. Of Spiritual Directors

Spirituality by Means of Autobiography

Fr. David Ryan, Archdiocesan Director of Catholic Youth Office

Report from World Youth Day

Eleanor Rae, PhD in Theology, Fordham University, founder and director of Center for

Women, the Earth, and the Divine, and others

Women, the Earth, and the World´s Religions

Dr. Otis Lawrence, Board of Governor´s State University Degree program

Fr. Oliver Jennings, Pastor of St. John De LaSalle Church

Sheila Adams, Catholic Archdiocese of Chicago, Ethnic Ministries

Rayetta Holman, Sister of Archbishop Lyke

Doris Fileds, Sister of Archbishop Like

Guide Me, Lead Me: Section One (based on work of Chicago’s Archbishop James

Patterson Lyke on strengthening the African American family)

Dr. Otis Lawrence, Board of Governor´s State University Degree program

Fr. Oliver Jennings, Pastor of St. John De LaSalle Church

Sheila Adams, Catholic Archdiocese of Chicago, Ethnic Ministries

Rayetta Holman, Sister of Archbishop Lyke

Doris Fileds, Sister of Archbishop Like

Guide Me, Lead Me: Section Two (based on work of Chicago’s Archbishop

James Patterson Lyke on strengthening the African American family)

Dr. William French, Professor of Theology, Loyola University, Chicago

Native American and Medieval Christian Views of the Community of Creation:

Black Elk, Thomas Aquinas, and St. Francis Speak

Fr. Richard Chilson, Paulist priest and pastor of Holy Spirit parish in Berkeley, California

The Practices of Other Religions and Christian Spirituality

363

William Vendley, Secretary General, World Conference on Religion and

Peace/International; former Dean, Doctor of Ministry and Master of Arts in Theology

programs and Professor of Theology, Roman Catholic Major Seminary, Long Island, and

others

Global Solutions

Catholics in The Academy Section6

Thursday, September 2

Dr. Teresa Albuquerque, Fellow of the Heras Insttute of Indian History and Culture,

Member of the Church History Association of India, member of the Asiatic Society of

Bombay

The Indian Impact on Christianity

Thomas A. Shannon, Paris Fletcher Distinguished Professor of the Humanities,

Worcester Polytechnic Institute, MA

Roman Catholicism and Genetic Engineering

Mary Oates, Professor of Economics, Regis College

The Evolution of Catholic Philanthropy in America

Friday, September 3

Michael Stoeber, PhD, Assistant Professor in the Department of Religion and Religious

Education, Catholic University of America

Theo-Monistic Mysticism and Religious Pluralism

6 Catholics were engaged as sole presenters in 4 out of 53 programs in The Academy section.

364

Catholics in the Conference on Pluralism

Identity, Conflict and Globality7

Tuesday, August 31

Professor Raimundo Panikkar, Doctorates in Chemistry, Philosophy, and Theology;

Professor Emeritus, University of California, Santa Barbara. Panikkar´s self-

identification is catholic-Hindu-Buddhist

Thematic Presentation: Religious Identity

Leo Lefebure, Professor, University of St. Mary on the Lake (moderator) and others

Working Session: Religious Identity

Rev. Jay Jung, CM, and panelists

Workshop: Vincentians/Daughters of Charity

Wednesday, September 1

Most Reverend Samuel Ruiz, Archbishop of Chiapas, Mexico

Thematic Presentation: Religious Conflict

Kay A. Read, Professor, DePaul University (moderator) and others

Working Session: Religious Conflict

Thursday, September 2

Paul Knitter, Professor of Theology, Xavier University, and others

Working Session: Globality

James Yellowbank, Winnebago treaty rights activist, Native American Community

Leader, director of the Aniwim Center for Native American Catholics of Chicago

Workshop: The Indian Treaty Rights Committee

7 Catholics were engaged as presenters in 9 out of 15 programs in the Conference on Pluralism; in

5 as sole presenters; in 4 as co-presenters or moderators.

365

Friday, September 3

Jeffrey Carlson, Professor of Religious Studies, DePaul University, Chicago (moderator)

and Harvey Cox, Arvind Sharma, Seyyed Hossein Nasr, Tu Wei-Ming, and Masao Abe

Panel: “Our Religions” in a Religiously Plural World

Robert J. Schreiter, Professor of Doctrinal Theology, Catholic Theological Union; and

Jeffrey Carlson, Professor of Religious Studies, DePaul University, Chicago

Summation/Call to Action

Catholics in the Science Symposium

Cosmic Beginnings, Human Ends8

Friday, September 3

Professor Raimundo Panikkar, Doctorates in Chemistry, Philosophy, and

TheologyProfessor Emeritus, University of California, Santa Barbara (panelist)

The Emerging Convergences in Religious Consciousness and their Confrontation

with International Technology

Mary Hunt, PhD, Graduate Theological Union, Berkeley, California; Co-Director,

Women´s Alliance for Theology, Ethics, and Ritual (WATER); member of the Board,

National Association for Science, Technology, and Society (NASTS) where she

represents the religious community

Crucial Conversations: Theology, Feminism, and Science

8 Catholics were engaged as presenters in 2 out of 11 programs in the Science Symposium; in 1 as

sole presenters; in 1 as panelists.

366

Catholics in Religion and Violence Symposium9

Tuesday, August 31

William Vendley, Secretary General, World Conference on Religion and

Peace/International; former Dean, Doctor of Ministry and Master of Arts in Theology

programs and Professor of Theology, Roman Catholic Major Seminary, Long Island

The Role of Religion in Conflict Resolution and Peacemaking

Friday, September 3

William Vendley, Secretary General, World Conference on Religion and

Peace/International; former Dean, Doctor of Ministry and Master of Arts in Theology

programs and Professor of Theology, Roman Catholic Major Seminary, Long Island,

among others

Visions for Unity Beyond Religious Conflict

Catholics in the Business Symposium

Ethics, Values and Spirituality in the Workplace10

Wednesday, September 1

Professor Hans Küng, Director of the Ecumenical Institute at Túbingen University in

Germany; and others

The Impact of the World´s Religions on the Ethics of Business in a Global

Economy

9 Catholics were engaged presenters in 2 out of 16 programs in the Religion and Violence

Symposium; in 1 as sole presenters; in 1 as co-presenters.

10 Catholics co-presented in 1 out of 12 programs in the Business Symposium.

367

Catholics in The Media Panels

New paradigms for Media in the 21st Century11

Friday, September 3

David Toolan, SJ, associate editor of AMERICA magazine, and others

Print and Broadcast Media

Catholics in Performance Series12

Friday, September 3

Elizabeth-Ann Vanek -D. Min.; University Ministry and Department of Religious

Studies, DePaul University, Chicago, and others

A Celebration of Poetry

Br. Joseph Kilikevice, OP, Dominican Friar and member of the mentor Teacher Guild of

the Dances of Universal Peace

Dances of Universal Peace

Carolyn Ford, Peace and Justice Director at St. Isidore Roman Catholic Church, Diocese

of Joliet

Sacred Chant: East and West

Rev. Paul Manship, Director Hispanic Youth Ministry, R.C. Diocese of Springfield, MA;

and Magdalena Gomez

Sacred Visions

11 Catholics co-presented in 1 out of 2 programs in The Media Panels.

12 Catholics participated in 3 out of 47 programs in the Performance series; in 2 as sole presenters;

in one as co-presenters.

368

Catholics in the Assembly of Religious and Spiritual Leaders

Rev. Thomas Baima, priest of the Archdiocese of Chicago and Director of Ecumenical

and Interreligious Affairs; trustee of the Council for a Parliament of the World’s

Religions.

His Eminence Joseph Cardinal Bernardin, Archbishop of Chicago.

Rev. Thomas Berry, priest of the Congregation of the Passion, Director of the Riverside

Center for Religious Research in New York and professor of Religious Studies at

Fordham University. Fr. Berry is considered a pioneer in the field of spiritual ecology.

Fr. Pierre-Francois de Bethune, OSB, Dialogue Interreligieux Monastique

Monastere St Andre de Clerlande, Belgium. Played major role in setting up the Pope’s

meeting of religious leaders in Assisi, 1986.

Dr. John Borelli, Interfaith and Ecumenical secretary of the Conference of Catholic

Bishops, consultor of the Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue.

Rev. Dr. Henry Charles, St Theresa’s Roman Catholic Church, Barataria, Trinidad and

Tobago, Assistant professor, St. Louis University (Department of Theological Studies).

Sister Joan M. Chatfield, Diocese of Honolulu, Maryknoll Mission sister and Director of

Institute of Religion and Change in Honolulu. She is the Chair of the Faiths in the World

Committee of the National Association of Diocesan Ecumenical Officers.

Rev. Monsignor John Egan, Priest of the Archdiocese of Chicago and assistant to the

President of DePaul University. He is considered a tireless agent for change in race

relations, civil rights and urban affairs for 50 years.

Most Rev. Joseph Gerry OSB, DD, Bishop of Portland, ME, Member of Pontifical

Council for Interreligious Dialogue.

Most Rev. Francesco Gioia, Vatican’s official Delegate to the 1993 Parliament of the

World’s Religions, appointed by Cardinal Francis Arinze.

Rev. Theodore M. Hesburgh, CSC, President Emeritus, Notre Dame University. Active

in the cause of world peace since retirement.

Abbot Timothy Kelly, OCSO, Gethsemane Abbey, Kentucky.

Mr. Jim Kenney, Vice-Chair, Executive Director, Common Ground, Chicago.

Dr. Hans Küng, Director of the Ecumenical Institute at Tübingen University in Germany.

369

Dolores Leaky, Executive Director of Secretariat for Laity, Women and Youth of the

National Conference of Catholic Bishops.

Sister Joan Monica McGuire, Dominican sister of the Congregation of Saint Catherine,

KY, Vice President for Ministry of her congregation. Former director of the Office of

Ecumenical and Interfaith Affairs of the Archdiocese of Chicago.

Rev. Maximilian Mizzi, Sacro Convento Di San Francesco, Delegate General for

Ecumenism and Interreligious Dialogue of the Conventual Franciscans, Frati Minori

Conventuali, Assisi.

Dr. Robert Muller, Chancellor Emeritus, University for Peace/Universidad de la Paz,

Costa Rica, Former Assistant Secretary General, United Nations, writer, peace activist,

recipient of the 1989 UNESCO Peace Education Prize.

Rev. Albert Nambiaparambil, CMI, Commission for Ecumenism & Dialogue, Secretary,

Catholic Bishops’ Conference of India. Secretary of World Fellowship of Interreligious

Councils.

Dr. Raimon Panikkar, Internationally known in interfaith dialogue.

Fr. M. Basil Pennington, OSB, Well-known Benedictibe monk. Author of books on

centering prayer. Member of Board of Monastic Interreligious Dialogue

Address North American Board of East-West Dialogue, St. Joseph Abbey, Spencer, MA.

The Very Rev. John Richardson, CM, President of DePaul University.

Most Rev. Placido Rodriguez, Auxiliary Bishop of Chicago.

Most Rev. Willy Romelus, Bishop of the Diocese of Jeremie, Haiti.

Most Rev. Samuel Ruiz Garcia, Bishop of Chiapas, Mexico.

Dorothy Savage, Ministries in Christian Education, National Conference of Catholic

Bishops.

Brother David Steindl-Rast, OSB, Benedictine monk and member of the Board of

Monastic Inter-religious Dialogue. Widely known for his writings and teachings on

contemplation and prayer. Sometimes called the spiritual heir of Thomas Merton, his

work relates the contemplative life to the critical issues of the world. Active in Buddhist

Christian Dialogue.

Brother Wayne Teasdale, Christian Sanyasi in the lineage of Bede Griffiths.

William Vendly, Interim Secretary, World Conference of Religion and Peace.

370

Catholics who signed the Declaration Towards a Global Ethic

Rev. Thomas Baima, priest of the Archdiocese of Chicago and Director of Ecumenical

and Interreligious Affairs; trustee of the Council for a Parliament of the World’s

Religions.

His Eminence Joseph Cardinal Bernardin, Archbishop of Chicago.

Fr. Pierre-Francois de Bethune, OSB, Dialogue Interreligieux Monastique

Monastere St Andre de Clerlande, Belgium. Played major role in setting up the Pope’s

meeting of religious leaders in Assisi, 1986.

Sister Joan M. Chatfield, Diocese of Honolulu, Maryknoll Mission sister and Director of

Institute of Religion and Change in Honolulu. She is the Chair of the Faiths in the World

Committee of the National Association of Diocesan Ecumenical Officers.

Rev. Theodore M. Hesburgh, CSC, President Emeritus, Notre Dame University. Active

in the cause of world peace since retirement.

Abbot Timothy Kelly, OCSO, Gethsemane Abbey, Kentucky.

Mr. Jim Kenney, Vice-Chair, Executive Director, Common Ground, Chicago

Dr. Hans Küng, Director of the Ecumenical Institute at Tübingen University in Germany.

Dolores Leaky, Executive Director of Secretariat for Laity, Women and Youth of the

National Conference of Catholic Bishops.

Sister Joan Monica McGuire, Dominican sister of the Congregation of Saint Catherine,

KY, Vice President for Ministry of her congregation. Former director of the Office of

Ecumenical and Interfaith Affairs of the Archdiocese of Chicago.

Rev. Maximilian Mizzi, Sacro Convento Di San Francesco, Delegate General for

Ecumenism and Interreligious Dialogue of the Conventual Franciscans, Frati Minori

Conventuali, Assisi.

Dr. Robert Muller, Chancellor Emeritus, University for Peace/Universidad de la Paz,

Costa Rica, Former Assistant Secretary General, United Nations, writer, peace activist,

recipient of the 1989 UNESCO Peace Education Prize.

Rev. Albert Nambiaparambil, CMI, Commission for Ecumenism & Dialogue, Secretary,

Catholic Bishops’ Conference of India. Secretary of World Fellowship of Interreligious

Councils.

Most Rev. Placido Rodriguez, Auxiliary Bishop of Chicago.

371

Most Rev. Willy Romelus, Bishop of the Diocese of Jeremie, Haiti.

Dorothy Savage, Ministries in Christian Education, National Conference of Catholic

Bishops.

Brother David Steindl-Rast, OSB, Benedictine monk and member of the Board of

Monastic Inter-religious Dialogue. Widely known for his writings and teachings on

contemplation and prayer. Sometimes called the spiritual heir of Thomas Merton, his

work relates the contemplative life to the critical issues of the world. Active in Buddhist

Christian Dialogue.

Brother Wayne Teasdale, Christian Sanyasi in the lineage of Bede Griffiths.

Other Prominent Catholic Attendees

Sister Mary Ellen Coombe, Member of the Sisters of Sion, associate director of

ecumenical and interreligious affairs Archdiocese of Chicago, joint staff appointment

with the American Jewish Committee.

Rev. Daniel Coughlin, Priest of the Archdiocese of Chicago, Director of the Cardinal

Stritch Retreat House.

Archbishop Angelo Fernandez, New Delhi, Emeritus from Delhi. International President

of the World Conference on Religion and Peace.

John Grim, Assistant Professor of Religion, Bucknell University and author of a book on

Native American shamanism, President of American Theilard Association.

Rev. Albert Hallin, Priest of the Diocese of Peoria, Pastor of Saint Columba Parish and

Episcopal Vicar for Ecumenism.

Rev. Elwood Kieser, CSP, Pastor of Saint Paul the Apostle Parish in Los Angeles, CA.

Director of the religious film Romero and the upcoming film on Dorothy Day.

Rev. Dr. Ellias D. Mallon, Graymoor, member exec comm. Temple of understanding.

Rev. Daniel Montalbano, STL, Pastor of Resurrection Parish, Associate Director of

Ecumenical and Interrligious Dialogue, Archidiocese of Chicago.

Dr. Rosemary Radford Ruether, Garrett Evangelical Theological Seminary, Evanston.

Proposed as invitee by Women of Faith.

Rev. John Shea, STD, priest of ArchChicago and professor of systematic theology at the

University of Saint Mary of the Lake and author of many books on spirituality.

Rev. Richard Simon, priest of Archdiocese of Chicago and Pastor of Saint Thomas of

Canterbury Paris

372

Appendix D

ALPHABETIC GENDER BREAKDOWN

OF 1993 CATHOLIC PARTICIPANTS

Women

Sheila Adams, African American Consultant of the Archdiocese of Chicago, Ethnic

Ministries (P)

Dr. Teresa Albuquerque, Fellow of the Heras Insttute of Indian History and Culture,

Member of the Church History Association of India, member of the Asiatic Society of

Bombay (P)

Sister Charlene Altemose, Missionary Sister of the Sacred Heart, Fullbright Scholar in

India (P)

Helen Alvare, Director of Planning and Information of the Secretariat for Pro-Life

Activities of the National Conference of Catholic Bishops (P)

Sr. Joanna Becker, Benedictine nun at St. Benedict’s Convent, St. Joseph, MN, member

of MID (P)

Sister Margaret Boyle, Sister of Our Lady of Zion, Chair of the DuPage Interfaith

Resource Network, former member of Christian-Jewish Dialogue of Toronto, Canadian

Council of Christians and Jews (P)

Sister Miriam Brown, OP, Executive Director, Churches’ Center for Land and People,

Wisconsin, Iowa, and Illinois (P)

Sister Joan M. Chatfield, Diocese of Honolulu, Maryknoll Mission sister and Director of

Institute of Religion and Change in Honolulu. Chair of the Faiths in the World

Committee of the National Association of Diocesan Ecumenical Officers

Sr. Pascaline Coff, O.S.B. PhD, Founder and Director of Osage Monastery in Sand

Springs, Oklahoma (P)

Sister Mary Ellen Coombe, Member of the Sisters of Sion, associate director of

ecumenical and interreligious affairs Archdiocese of Chicago, joint staff appointment

with the American Jewish Committee.

Elizabeth Espersen, Executive Director, Thanks-Giving Square, Dallas, Texas, national

and international programs; Co-Chair of North American Interfaith Network (P)

373

Dr. Elizabeth Ferrero, St. Thomas University, Miami (P)

Doris Fields, Sister of Archbishop Like (P)

Carolyn Ford, Peace and Justice Director at St. Isidore Roman Catholic Church, Diocese

of Joliet (P)

Virginia Ann Froehle, Sister of Mercy and author (P)

Prioress Margaret Mary Funk, OSB, Superior of Our Lady of Grace Monastery, member

of Contemplative Outreach, member of Board of Directors of MID (P)

Edwina Gateley, Catholic lay minister; founder, Volunteer Missionary Movement, which

has sent over 1000 men and women to serve in developing countries, and Genesis House,

which serves women in prostitution (P)

Mary A. Hallan, director of Respect Life Activities for the Archdiocese of Chicago (P)

Rayetta Holman, Sister of Archbishop Lyke (P)

Mary Hunt, PhD, Graduate Theological Union, Berkeley, California; Co-Director,

Women´s Alliance for Theology, Ethics, and Ritual (WATER); member of the Board,

National Association for Science, Technology, and Society (NASTS) where she

represents the religious community (P)

Jo-Ellen Karstens –member of the Focolare Movement (P)

Claire Langton, the mother of a young woman with cerebral palsy (P)

Mary-Anne Langton, Co-Director of Office of Persons with Disabilities of the Roman

Catholic Archdiocese of Hartford (P)

Dolores Leaky, Executive Director of Secretariat for Laity, Women and Youth of the

National Conference of Catholic Bishops.

Hanne Marstrand Strong, President Manitou Foundation, originally from Denmark; a

Lutheran raised as a Roman Catholic (P)

Sister Joan Monica McGuire, Dominican sister of the Congregation of Saint Catherine,

KY, Vice President for Ministry of her congregation. Former director of the Office of

Ecumenical and Interfaith Affairs of the Archdiocese of Chicago

Teresita Nuval, Asian American Consultant of the Archdiocese of Chicago (P)

Mary Oates, Professor of Economics, Regis College (P)

Asha Paul D’Silva, Disciple of Fr. Bede Griffiths (P)

374

Eleanor Rae, PhD in Theology, Fordham University, founder and director of Center for

Women, the Earth, and the Divine, and others (P)

Kay A. Read, Professor, DePaul University (P)

Dr. Rosemary Radford Ruether, Garrett Evangelical Theological Seminary, Evanston

Regina Sara Ryan, MA, former Catholic nun, coordinator of the First Conference on

Crazy Wisdom and Divine Madness in 1992 (P)

Dorothy Savage, Ministries in Christian Education, National Conference of Catholic

Bishops

Ms. Pat Smuck, Catholic laywoman; member, National Council of Catholic women (P)

Mary Southard, CSJ, Sister of St. Joseph of La Grange, co-founder and co-director of

SpiritEarth, Center for the Sacred Universe, New England (P)

Dr. Mary Evelyn Tucker, historian of religions (Confucianism in Japan) (P)

Elizabeth-Ann Vanek -D. Min.; University Ministry and Department of Religious

Studies, DePaul University, Chicago (P)

Dr. Catherine Wessinger, Religious Studies scholar associated with Loyola University,

New Orleans (P)

Krystyna Zambrzycki, American-European Consultant of the Archdiocese of Chicago (P)

Sr. Dominga Zapata, Society of Helpers, Hispanic and Native American Consultant of

the Archdiocese of Chicago (P)

Sister Suzanne Zuercher, OSB, licensed psychologist, author on two books on the

enneagram, former co-director of Institute of Spiritual Leadership at Loyola University.

Proposed as invitee by Women of Faith (P)

42 women

13 women religious

13 women scholars

36 in the program as presenters (P)

14 from Chicago

26 from elsewhere in the USA

2 from India

375

Men

Fr. Richard Ament, Rural pastor, team of five parishes (P)

Fr. Thomas Baima, priest of the Archdiocese of Chicago and Director of Ecumenical and

Interreligious Affairs; trustee of the Council for a Parliament of the World’s Religions (P)

Father Bruno Barnhardt, Camaldolese monk, member of MID (P)

His Eminence Joseph Cardinal Bernardin, Archbishop of Chicago (P)

Thomas Berry, historian of religions and writer with special concern for the foundation of

cultures in their relations with the natural world (P)

Fr. Pierre-Francois de Bethune, OSB, Dialogue Interreligieux Monastique

Monastere St Andre de Clerlande, Belgium. Played major role in setting up the Pope’s

meeting of religious leaders in Assisi, 1986

Dr. John Borelli, Interfaith and Ecumenical secretary of the Conference of Catholic

Bishops, consultor of the Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue

Rev. Louis Cameli, priest of the Archdiocese of Chicago, member of the Catholic

Theological Society of America, and the Midwest Assc. Of Spiritual Directors (P)

Dr. Jeffrey Carlson, Professor of Religious Studies, DePaul University, Chicago (P)

John Carr, Secretary for Social Development and World Peace of the United States

Catholic Conference (P)

Rev. Dr. Henry Charles, St Theresa’s Roman Catholic Church, Barataria, Trinidad and

Tobago, Assistant professor, St. Louis University, Department of Theological Studies (P)

Fr. Richard Chilson, Paulist priest and pastor of Holy Spirit parish in Berkeley, California

(P)

Fr. James Connor, OCSO, Trappist monk of the Abbey of Gethsemani, Kentucky,

member of MID and editor of its publication, Bulletin (P)

Rev. Daniel Coughlin, Priest of the Archdiocese of Chicago, Director of the Cardinal

Stritch Retreat House

Prof. Ewart Cousins, Professor of Theology, Fordham University; General Editor of the

twenty-five volume series, World Spirituality; former consultant to the Vatican

Secretariat on Inter-Religious Dialogue (P)

Mayor Richard M. Daley, Mayor of Chicago, Honorary Chairperson (P)

376

Rev. Dr. César A. Dávila, founder and president of the Yoga and Christianity Movement

in the Americas (P)

Rev. Peter Dougherty, priest of the Roman Catholic Diocese of Lansing, Michigan,

founder of Covenant for Peace, a faith-based peace community that focuses on the

dangers of the nuclear arms race (P)

Fr. Roy Drake, SJ, Expert on drug and alcohol abuse (P)

Fr. Julian von Duerbeck, Benedictine monk of St. Procopius Abbey, Lisle, IL; member of

MID (P)

Rev. Monsignor John Egan, Priest of the Archdiocese of Chicago and assistant to the

President of DePaul University. He is considered a tireless agent for change in race

relations, civil rights and urban affairs for 50 years

Archbishop Angelo Fernandez, New Delhi, Emeritus from Delhi. International President

of the World Conference on Religion and Peace

Rev. Dr. Enzo Maria Fondi, one of the originators of the Focolare Movement in Italy and

in the former German Democratic Republic; now a central director of the movement (P)

Dr. William French, Professor of Theology, Loyola University, Chicago (P)

Fr. Albert Fritsch, SJ, Director of Earth Healing (P)

Br. Ted Funk, Xaverian brother

Most Rev. Joseph Gerry OSB, DD, Bishop of Portland, ME, Member of Pontifical

Council for Interreligious Dialogue.

Most Rev. Francesco Gioa, Delegate, Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue,

Vatican City, former Archbishop of Camerino, San Severino Marche (P)

John Grim, Assistant Professor of Religion, Bucknell University and author of a book on

Native American shamanism, President of American Theilard Association

Rev. Albert Hallin, Priest of the Diocese of Peoria, Pastor of Saint Columba Parish and

Episcopal Vicar for Ecumenism

Mr. Francis P. Hannigan, Director of the Family Ministries Office of the Catholic

Archdiocese of Chicago (P)

Rev. Gilbert G. Hardy, Cistercian Monk, Professor of Philosophy at the University of

Dallas (P)

Dr. Patrick Henry, Executive Director, Institute for Ecumenical and Cultural Research in

Collegeville, MN

377

Rev. Theodore M. Hesburgh, CSC, President Emeritus, Notre Dame University. Active

in the cause of world peace since retirement

Fr. Oliver Jennings, Pastor of St. John De LaSalle Church

Rev. Jay Jung, CM (P)

Fr. Thomas Kane, Paulist priest, Professor of Theology at the Weston School of

Theology in Cambridge, MA (P)

Dr. John Kaserow, Maryknoll priest, Professor of Mission, Catholic Theological Union,

Chicago (P)

James Kavanaugh, PhD, former Catholic priest, poet and author (P)

Abbot Timothy Kelly, OCSO, Gethsemane Abbey, Kentucky.

Mr. Jim Kenney, Vice-Chair, Executive Director, Common Ground, Chicago (P)

Rev. Elwood Kieser, CSP, Pastor of Saint Paul the Apostle Parish in Los Angeles, CA.

Director of the religious film Romero and the upcoming film on Dorothy Day

Br. Joseph Kilikevice, OP, Dominican Friar and member of the mentor Teacher Guild of

the Dances of Universal Peace (P)

Fr. John Killian, priest of the Diocese of Buffalo, Attica, NY.

Paul Knitter, Professor of Theology, Xavier University (P)

Fr. Thomas Kocherry, Redemptorist priest, President of the National Fish Workers

Federation in India, bringing all fish workers along the coastline of India together and

organizing them against the big mechanized trawlers that are monopolizing the waters (P)

Dr. Hans Küng, Director of the Ecumenical Institute at Tübingen University in Germany

(P)

Albert LaChance, husband, father, poet, environmentalist, therapist, lecturer; co-founder

with his wife, Carol, of Greenspirit Center in New Hampshire; author of Greenspirit:

Twelve Step in Ecological Spirituality, a book highly recommended by Thomas Berry as

a practical extension of his own work (P)

Dr. Otis Lawrence, Board of Governor´s State University Degree program (P)

Leo Lefebure, Professor, University of St. Mary on the Lake (P)

Rev. Dr. Ellias D. Mallon, Graymoor, member exec comm. Temple of understanding

Dr. Daniel Martin, Roman Catholic priest. Founder/Director, International Coordinating

Committee on Religion and the Earth (P)

378

Fr. Yvon Masaac, parish of Fermathe, Haiti (P)

Fr. Thomas Matus, Camaldolese Monk (P)

Dr. Dennis McCann, Professor of Ethics at DePaul University, Chicago (P)

Rev. Michael McGarry, priest of the Congregation of Saint Paul and Rector, St. Paul

College, Washington, DC. Member of NADEO (P)

Donald Mitchell, Professor of comparative philosophy, Purdue University

Thomas A. Shannon, Paris Fletcher Distinguished Professor of the Humanities,

Worcester Polytechnic Institute, MA (P)

Rev. Maximilian Mizzi, Sacro Convento Di San Francesco, Delegate General for

Ecumenism and Interreligious Dialogue of the Conventual Franciscans, Frati Minori

Conventuali, Assisi

Rev. Daniel Montalbano, STL, Pastor of Resurrection Parish, Associate Director of

Ecumenical and Interrligious Dialogue, Archidiocese of Chicago

Brian Muldoon, attorney involved in conflict resolution work through the Dearborn

Institute (P)

Dr. Robert Müller, Chancellor Emeritus, University for Peace/Universidad de la Paz,

Costa Rica, Former Assistant Secretary General, United Nations, writer, peace activist,

recipient of the 1989 UNESCO Peace Education Prize (P)

F. Byron (Ron) Nahser, President and CEO, Frank C. Nahser, Inc. B.A., Notre Dame

University, M.A., Mundelein College, PhD, De Paul University (P)

Rev. Albert Nambiaparambil, CMI, Commission for Ecumenism & Dialogue, Secretary,

Catholic Bishops’ Conference of India. Secretary of World Fellowship of Interreligious

Councils

Professor Raimundo Panikkar, Doctorates in Chemistry, Philosophy, and Theology;

Professor Emeritus, University of California, Santa Barbara. Panikkar´s self-

identification is Catholic-Hindu-Buddhist (P)

Russill Paul D’Silva, Disciple of Fr. Bede Griffiths, composer, musician and vocalist, and

Asha Paul D’Silva, Disciple of Fr. Bede Griffiths (P)

Richard J. Payne, editor, publisher, conceived and developed the 75-volume The Classics

of Western Spirituality, the 25-volume World Spirituality: An Encyclopedic History of the

Religious Quest, and the forthcoming 60-volume The Classics of Eastern Spirituality;

Executive Director, the Arcadian Institute, Rockport, MA (P)

379

Fr. M. Basil Pennington, OSB, Author of books on centering prayer. Member of Board of

Monastic Interreligious Dialogue, St. Joseph Abbey, Spencer, MA

Burton Pretty On Top, Crow Nation; spiritual leader and pipe carrier (P)

Dr. John Renard, Professor of Theology, St. Louis University; member of NADEO (P)

The Very Rev. John Richardson, CM, President of DePaul University

Most Reverend Plácido Rodríguez, Auxiliary Bishop of Chicago

Bishop Willie Romelus, Diocese of Jérémie in Haiti (P)

Roland Ropers, Oblate of the Order of St. Benedict and friend of Fr. Bede Griffiths (P)

Most Reverend Samuel Ruiz García, Bishop of Chiapas, Mexico (P)

Fr. David Ryan, Archdiocesan Director of Catholic Youth Office (P)

Fr. Thomas Ryan, Paulist priest, Director of the Canadian Centre for Ecumenism in

Montreal, Canada (P)

Robert J. Schreiter, Professor of Doctrinal Theology, Catholic Theological Union (P)

Rev. John Shea, STD, priest of ArchChicago and professor of systematic theology at the

University of Saint Mary of the Lake and author of many books on spirituality

Rev. Richard Simon, priest of Archdiocese of Chicago and Pastor of Saint Thomas of

Canterbury Parish

Michael Stoeber, PhD, Assistant Professor in the Department of Religion and Religious

Education, Catholic University of America (P)

David Steindl-Rast, OSB, Benedictine monk, advisor to MID (P)

Charles Strain, Professor of Religious Studies, DePaul University (P)

Br. Wayne Teasdale, Christian sannyasi in the lineage of Fr. Bede Griffiths (P)

David Toolan, SJ, associate editor of AMERICA magazine (P)

Fr. David Tracy, Professor at the University of Chicago (P)

William Vendley, Secretary General, World Conference on Religion and

Peace/International; former Dean, Doctor of Ministry and Master of Arts in Theology

programs and Professor of Theology, Roman Catholic Major Seminary, Long Island (P)

James Yellowbank, Winnebago treaty rights activist, Native American Community

Leader, director of the Aniwim Center for Native American Catholics of Chicago (P)

380

87 men

29 lay

04 religious brothers

10 monks

27 religious priests

21 diocesan priests

04 bishops

03 archbishops

01 cardinal

29 scholars

63 in the program as presenters (P)

28 from Chicago

41 from elsewhere in the USA

18 from other countries (India, Italy, Belgium, Ecuador, Haiti, Trinidad and Mexico)